{"id":6364,"date":"2016-07-29T14:19:32","date_gmt":"2016-07-29T14:19:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/?p=6364"},"modified":"2016-07-29T14:20:00","modified_gmt":"2016-07-29T14:20:00","slug":"opposition-biotech-endangers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/blog\/2016\/07\/opposition-biotech-endangers\/","title":{"rendered":"Public Opposition to Biotech Endangers Your Life and Health – Article by Edward Hudgins"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"The<\/a>Edward Hudgins<\/span>
\n<\/big><\/big><\/strong><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
******************************<\/div>\n
\n

Do you want to be smarter, healthier, and live longer? Remarkably, a new Pew survey found that most Americans answer \u201cNo!\u201d if it requires using certain new technologies. This is a wakeup call for scientists, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, transhumanists, and all of us who value our lives: we must fight for our lives on the battlefield of values.<\/p>\n

\"CRISPR\"<\/a>Worries about human enhancement<\/strong><\/p>\n

We all understand how information technology has transformed our world with PCs, smartphones, the Internet, and Google. Nanotech, robotics, artificial intelligence, and, especially, genetic engineering are poised to unleash the next wave of wealth creation and improvements of the human condition.<\/p>\n

But a new Pew survey entitled U.S. Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to \u201cEnhance\u201d Human Abilities<\/a><\/i> found that \u201cMajorities of U.S. adults say they would be \u2018very\u2019 or \u2018somewhat\u2019 worried about gene editing (68%), brain chips (69%) and synthetic blood (63%),\u201d technologies that in years to come could make us healthier, smarter, and stronger. While some say they \u201cwould be both enthusiastic and worried \u2026 overall, concern outpaces excitement.\u201d Further, \u201cMore say they would not want enhancements of their brains and their blood (66% and 63%, respectively) than say they would want them (32% and 35%).\u201d<\/p>\n

Simply a reflection of individuals making decisions about their own lives, as is their right? Not quite. Their concerns about technology are already causing cultural and political pushback from left and right that could derail the advances sought by those of us who want better lives.<\/p>\n

The Pew data reveals two ideological sources of opposition to new technologies.<\/p>\n

Religion and meddling with nature<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"brain.chip_.grids_\"<\/a>The survey found that 64% of Americans with a high religious commitment say \u201cgene editing giving babies a much reduced disease risk\u201d is \u201cmeddling with nature and crosses a line we should not cross.\u201d Are you stunned that anyone could prefer to expose their own babies to debilitating or killer diseases when a prevention is possible?<\/p>\n

And 65% with such a commitment have a similar opinion of \u201cbrain chip implants for much improved cognitive abilities.\u201d Better to remain ignorant when a way to more knowledge is possible?<\/p>\n

Obsession with inequality of abilities<\/p>\n

When asked if \u201cgene editing giving babies a much reduced disease risk\u201d is an appropriate use of technology, 54% answered \u201cYes\u201d if<\/i> it results in people \u201calways equally healthy as the average person.\u201d But only 42% approved if it results in people \u201cfar healthier than any human known to date.\u201d Similarly, 47% approved of synthetic blood if it results in physical improvements in individuals \u201cequal to their own peak ability,\u201d while only 28% approved if it results in improvements \u201cfar above that of any human known to date.\u201d<\/p>\n

Here we see the ugly side of egalitarianism. Better for everyone to be less healthy than for some to be healthier than others.<\/p>\n

\"synthetic_blood-alamy_Small\"<\/a>This inequality concern is another aspect of warped values we find in economic discussions. What if everyone enjoys rising levels of prosperity in a free-market system, but some individuals\u2014Steve Jobs? Mark Zuckerberg?\u2014become much wealthier than others through their own productive efforts? It\u2019s win-win! But many would punish and demonize such achievers because they are the \u201ctop 1 percent,\u201d even if such treatment means that those achievers produce less and, thus, everyone is less prosperous. Better we\u2019re all poorer but more equal.<\/p>\n

A disappearing digital divide<\/strong><\/p>\n

We saw this inequality concern in the 1990s when desktop PCs and the Internet were taking off. Some projected a \u201cdigital divide.\u201d There would be more intelligent and advantaged individuals because they could access a universe of information through these technologies. And there would be those with little access who would fall further behind. Of course, what fell was the price of those technologies, which even then were accessible for free at most local libraries and now are in laptops, tablets, and smartphones, and affordable to most low-income individuals. The divide disappeared.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\"Computers\"<\/a><\/p>\n

There were early adopters prosperous enough to try new information technologies. Similarly, there will be early adopters of biomedical tech, which later will become accessible to all\u2014but only if enough people value it rather than fear it and demand that the government stop it.<\/p>\n

The fight for values<\/strong><\/p>\n

In a companion piece to the Pew survey, entitled Human Enhancement: The Scientific and Ethical Dimensions of Striving for Perfection<\/a><\/i>, Pew senior writer David Masci offers a good overview of serious moral issues raised by biotech and other exponential technologies. And those of us who welcome these technologies must fight for the moral values on which they are based.<\/p>\n

We truly value our lives, and the happiness and flourishing that we as individuals can get out of them through our own achievements. We must shake others out of their spiritual lethargy so that they too will not let their precious lives waste away.<\/p>\n

We must promote the values of reason and science as the means to better technology and as guides for our individual lives. Misguided dogmas, whether religious or political, lead to social and personal stagnation.<\/p>\n

We must develop and implement strategies to promote human achievement, including enhancement of our capacities, as a value in our culture through our institutions\u2014schools, media\u2014and our aesthetics\u2014movies, art, music.<\/p>\n

We must offer an exciting and compelling vision of a fantastic, nonfiction future, of a world as it can be and should be, especially to young people who thirst for a future that will be worth living.<\/p>\n

The values on which this future is based will not sell themselves. We must not only create the technology that will allow us to live healthier, smarter and stronger. We must also create the culture that will encourage and celebrate the creation and use of such technology.<\/p>\n

Edward Hudgins is the director of advocacy for The Atlas Society and the editor and author of several books on politics and government policy.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Copyright The Atlas Society. For more information, please visit www.atlassociety.org<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Edward Hudgins ****************************** Do you want to be smarter, healthier, and live longer? Remarkably, a new Pew survey found that most Americans answer \u201cNo!\u201d if it requires using certain new technologies. This is a wakeup call for scientists, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, transhumanists, and all of us who value our lives: we must fight for our lives on the battlefield of values. Worries about human enhancement We all understand how information technology has transformed our world with PCs, smartphones, the Internet,…<\/p>\n

Read More Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[87,662,356,104],"tags":[535,1649,4535,2177,4770,4481,521,412,4769,95,2038,1060,4771,2524,2012,1583],"class_list":["post-6364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-culture","category-science-2","category-technology-2","category-transhumanism","tag-biotechnology","tag-edward-hudgins","tag-equality","tag-genetic-engineering","tag-human-enhancement","tag-inequality","tag-life-extension","tag-nanotechnology","tag-pew","tag-progress","tag-public-opinion","tag-religion","tag-resistance","tag-silicon-valley","tag-survey","tag-transhumanist"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6364","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6364"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6364\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6372,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6364\/revisions\/6372"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rationalargumentator.com\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}