We wear glasses for poor vision, medicate our entire lives for inherited diseases, and get plastic surgery to enhance our appearance. Is there something inherently different about using genetic engineering to fix these same problems?
I don't much like either of it.
Whatever happened to good old natural selection?
I think the only real difference is the amount of testing that has been done.
Good point, I should have said "developing" instead of "using" or something like that. If in the end we had tested and came up with a fairly safe and reliable method, do you think it would be ok?
I personally would view them as equals, but I think it will take a little time before that is the societal consensus.
Treating, fixing, or alleviating something is different from changing the internal structure/makeup/GENETICS of something. Very very different.
And this just occurred to me: taking meds for a medical problem means that you lived with the problem beforehand and that experience effected you even if in the smallest way, genetic engineering means that you will never have lived through the
Lived through the experience of having had said issue(s) so you will never know what it would have been like without it. Every single detail of our lives shape us no matter how big or small so we would not be the same person even if every other
Every other thing would have been the same. I just don't think that genetic engineering is at all identical to taking meds or wearing glasses, sorry dude
Ha ha, you don't have to apologize, just wondering what people thought. :)
Your points make sense... I just wonder whether given the choice, a parent wouldn't want to prevent some major health issues before they started.
I know vision and appearance are far cries from disease, but do we feel weird about it because of our comfort level with messing with nature, or is it because there's legitimately something different between prevention and dealing with what we have?
I know dealing with a health issue helps shape a person's personality and life, but that seems like a concern for someone who knows what's to come. Why then do we bother to treat otherwise bearable conditions if coping gives some benefit?
I mean a parent wanting to do save a child from a potential life altering medical problem is absolutely OK but i just don't think that it is the same thing as that parent putting the child on meds to treat the illness. But I have to say that it is
That it is a very different situation to prevent than it is to treat because you have to look at the picture as a whole and not just one section of it. Imagine what the world would be like today if WWII had been prevented for example.