13 Mar 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerThat would bring us back to the question of what is "good" or "bad".
I suppose the counter-argument to twh's argument that we can come up with design improvements would be that, in reality, we simply can't. Either the "new designs" would be impossible in reality, or would cause more harm than good.
I know for a fact that I could come up with designs that would be good for me by my understanding of "good".
The "impossible in reality" bit is a tough one as it is the redesign of reality that is being discussed.
13 Mar 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadBy "impossible in reality" I was thinking of something like X-ray vision, or winged humans or something like that.
That would bring us back to the question of what is "good" or "bad".
I know for a fact that I could come up with designs that would be good for me by my understanding of "good".
The "impossible in reality" bit is a tough one as it is the redesign of reality that is being discussed.
But, more generally, what I had in mind were things like GM crops etc. We could alter the genes of a strain of wheat (say) for greater productivity, but completely mess up the soil doing so. Not that I'm saying that is the case (although I do recall a Sci.Am. article a very long time ago on the environmental and health ill-effects of certain GM crops), and I am aware that we do tinker with Mother Nature's genetics in breeding.