Practical Ethics

Humane Evolution

Professor John Harris wonders Who’s afraid of a synthetic human? in the Times. He argues we should support the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill because it will help us develop effective therapies and enhance ourselves. Science is about bettering our lot, after all. In particular, he says, synthetic biology may help us avoid going extinct due to our vulnerabilities and instead enable us to choose (or become) our successors as a species.

Many people become confused by the possibility of a posthuman future. The traditional view of the future is a stark one: either humanity extinct, or humans roughly as they are today. The posthuman options would be that we either change ourselves so radically that the resulting species is so  fundamentally different from humanity that we would regard it as something entirely new, or that we create some kind of independent beings that continue our culture even as traditional humanity retires from the forefront (hopefully as proud parents of the new beings). The range of possible options within these scenarios is endless, inviting equally endless and loud speculation. That tends to distract from the key message of Harris’ essay: we are leaving the realm of natural evolution and entering what he calls a realm of enhancement evolution.

The Dignity of the Carrot

What are you allowed to do to plants? At least in Switzerland you are not allowed to do research that deeply offend the dignity of plants. The Swiss federal Gene Technology Law stipulates that any scientific research should respect the "dignity of creation". All plant biotechnology grant applications must now state how they take plant dignity into consideration, confusing researchers.  The Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) have issued some guidelines (pdf) which make the situation even more confusing. Neither humans nor plants are likely to be helped.