Eugenics

[Rye]

OK, this is my question to y'all.

In what cases would it be ok to change what a person was going to be and for what reason?

Is a disabled person's life worth less than an able bodied person?

Is it ok to change what a person fundamentally was going to be in the interest of ease?

When would it be going to far in order to control our own evolution? Cosmetics? IQ?


Thoughts please, all arguments presuming we've got a gene therapy that works and we know most of the ins and outs of how to do it.*

[Rye]

Add to that list someone who would be predisposed to turn into a sucide fundy.

[DarthBlight]

I don't think anyone here would argue against using gene therapy to cure a lethal genetic disease (Tay-Sach's, hemophilia, xerosum pigmentosum, etc.) However, you do bring up some fuzzier areas.

Do I think a disabled person is worth less than a fully able person? No, I don't. Do I think a disabled person should be allowed to fix a disability if desired? It can happen, look at the stink the deaf community have with cochlear implants, and I think they should every opportunity to do so.

"Changing what you fundamentally would be in the interest of ease?" Could make this a little more clear? Are you talking about something like "Brave New World" or something else entirely?

For controlling evolution, I wouldn't worry about it too much. The universe always seems to find a way to bring humans down a peg when needed.
Cosmetics? Possibly. Looks are just looks anyway. However, if it is the person's choice, I say let them.
IQ? Since IQ is really an artificial thing that has little to no bearing on the way a person functions, I won't sweat it too much.

[Rye]

sorry, the "what people fundamentally are with ease" thing sounded a bit too religious for my liking. i shall chatise myself later for it. What i was talking about was like curing a genetic cause for kidney failure, or cystic fibrosis. We can deal with them now, but their quality of life is substandard.
To make life easier for everyone was the jist of it.

[Kuroneko]

Is a disabled person's life worth less than an able bodied person?

I don't think that even the question itself is meaningful. It would require there to be some kind of objective measure of "worth". I really doubt that is the case. Such value judgments are invariably with respect to some particular function or emotion, even implictly. Sure, an able bodied person is "worth" more in a marathon, but then try telling Steven Hawking he's not "worth" as much in physics as some guy down the street because he has infinitely better motor control. If one tries to talk about "worth" as if it was an absolute, the entire question becomes meaningless.