Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

Bush's Advisers on Biotechnology Express Concern on Its Use

search

Rattle
Picture of Rattle
Rattle's Pics
My Blog
My Profile
My Audience
My Sources
Send Me a Message

sponsored links

Rattle's topics
Arts
  Literature
   Sci-Fi/Fantasy Literature
  Movies
  Music
Business
  Tech Industry
  Telecom Industry
Games
Health and Wellness
Holidays
Miscellaneous
  Humor
  MemeStreams
   Using MemeStreams
Current Events
  War on Terrorism
  Elections
Recreation
  Travel
Local Information
  SF Bay Area
   SF Bay Area News
Science
  Biology
  History
  Nano Tech
  Physics
  Space
Society
  Economics
  Futurism
  International Relations
  Politics and Law
   Civil Liberties
    Internet Civil Liberties
    Surveillance
   Intellectual Property
  Media
   Blogging
  Military
  Security
Sports
Technology
  Biotechnology
  Computers
   Computer Security
    Cryptography
   Cyber-Culture
   PC Hardware
   Computer Networking
   Macintosh
   Linux
   Software Development
    Open Source Development
    Perl Programming
    PHP Programming
   Spam
   Web Design
  Military Technology
  High Tech Developments

support us

Get MemeStreams Stuff!


 
Bush's Advisers on Biotechnology Express Concern on Its Use
Topic: Science 3:23 pm EDT, Oct 19, 2003

] Laying a broad basis for possible future prescriptions, the
] President's Council on Bioethics yesterday issued an
] analysis of how biotechnology could lead toward
] unintended and destructive ends.

Comments on the matter from Decius:

I must express some suspicion of this given that we already understand what the administration's perspective of this is. Is this a search for answers, or a hammer looking for a nail?

Some of the NYT's quotes reveal a mixed bag:

For example, this makes sense to me:
"By medicalizing key elements of our life through biotechnical interventions," the report says, "we may weaken our sense of responsibility and agency."

We already do this in many different ways.

On the other hand, I cannot imagine a more foolish luddism then this statement:

It concludes that "the human body and mind, highly complex and delicately balanced as a result of eons of gradual and exacting evolution, are almost certainly at risk from any ill-considered attempt at `improvement.' "

While the wording here is carefully chosen, the message is clear. Obviously there are risks. Everything has risks. It is important to understand risks and avoid them. But by waxing about the perfection of the human being and placing the word improvement in quotes, the author is not really referring to risk management. He stops short of arguing that all activity in this space would be counterproductive only because he can't prove that. He is saying that biotechnology is bad.

What this perspective ignores is that every single technological development in the history of man, from the first wooden spear to the space shuttle, has been an attempt to escape the boundaries of what nature has given us. That is, in fact, fundamentally what makes us human and what differs us from most other animals. We invent technologies which help us adapt to environmental pressures that other species cannot adapt to because they adapt at random and without will.

To claim that we have no reason to continue to expand the boundaries of our capabilities is the same sort of narcissistic bullshit that lead Fukuyama, who made large contributions to this paper, to conclude that we are at the end of political history. This perspective is absolutely ignorant of human nature.

Bush's Advisers on Biotechnology Express Concern on Its Use



 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics
RSS2.0