Foreseeable Consequences of Designer Babies

[Deleted]

Well 1. Homosexuality is not a mental illness 2. Austism is not inheritantly bad (I have autism and so did/does Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin, Michelangelo, Tim Burton and Stanley Kubrick) 3. I agree with everything else

1 and 2 are very cultural issues that change with the times and your location. These cultural values are born partly out of necessity. Right now 1 and 2 are things you have to accept because you cannot change them, and various cultures deal with them in various different ways.

In the scenario as described, you could potentially (who knows what exactly will be possible and what not) change 1 and 2, and as such culture will change to reflect that, for better or for worse. ie some cultures may try to cure what they see as problems, while other cultures may choose to spread the same values because they see them as desirable.

[Techno-Druid]

1 and 2 are very cultural issues that change with the times and your location. These cultural values are born partly out of necessity. Right now 1 and 2 are things you have to accept because you cannot change them, and various cultures deal with them in various different ways.

In the scenario as described, you could potentially (who knows what exactly will be possible and what not) change 1 and 2, and as such culture will change to reflect that, for better or for worse. ie some cultures may try to cure what they see as problems, while other cultures may choose to spread the same values because they see them as desirable.

Well my thing is low spectrum autism is not neccessarily a bad thing. High spectrum where people are nearly incapable of speech or social intereaction normally at any degree is usually bad

[Rhine101]

Better question. Who wil volunteer their babies as experiments to work out the kinks?

[frogger237]

The main problem I see with designer babies is that babies don't know how to draw let alone use computer software so I'm sure we will end up with shitty fashion, jewelry, etc..

[Sama-81]

Well 1. Homosexuality is not a mental illness 2. Austism is not inheritantly bad (I have autism and so did/does Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin, Michelangelo, Tim Burton and Stanley Kubrick) 3. I agree with everything else

As far as I'm aware, Einstein actually didn't have autism (as in was diagnosed, or there being sufficient evidence to diagnose him in retrospect). I know there are a few psychologists that claim he was *, but from what I've read of the claims, those are not a far cry away from being pure guesswork. Usually with an agenda attached to the conclusion. The same is actually true for more people on your list - I don't mind autistic people not feeling like victims or some such, that's indeed a good thing, but why give false diagnoses to famous people? Rather disrespectful, imo. And to be honest, we shouldn't try to deny that actual autism is by definiton a neurodevelopmental disorder.

For that matter, for you point one...lets not open that can of worms, but just point out that in the context of society and politics - obviously not a disorder. In strictly scientific terms...it might very well be, actually. The jury is still out. But again, lets leave that one alone.


Edit: Maybe I should point out that having a few traits reminiscent of autism, does NOT make you autistic in the clinical sense.

[Techno-Druid]

As far as I'm aware, Einstein actually didn't have autism (as in was diagnosed, or there being sufficient evidence to diagnose him in retrospect). I know there are a few psychologists that claim he was *, but from what I've read of the claims, those are not a far cry away from being pure guesswork. Usually with an agenda attached to the conclusion. The same is actually true for more people on your list - I don't mind autistic people not feeling like victims or some such, that's indeed a good thing, but why give false diagnoses to famous people? Rather disrespectful, imo. And to be honest, we shouldn't try to deny that actual autism is by definiton a neurodevelopmental disorder.

For that matter, for you point one...lets not open that can of worms, but just point out that in the context of society and politics - obviously not a disorder. In strictly scientific terms...it might very well be, actually. The jury is still out. But again, lets leave that one alone.


Edit: Maybe I should point out that having a few traits reminiscent of autism, does NOT make you autistic in the clinical sense.

Prof Michael Fitzgerald conducted research on Charles Darwin, and supplied numerous facts supporting his theory that Darwin was autistic. Fitzgerald stated that Darwin was a solitary child, and even as he grew to be an adult, avoided interaction with people as much as he could. He wrote letters often, but did not often partake in face-to-face communication. Writing letters was his preferred means of communication. This is similar to other autistics who adopt other ways to communicate that vary from direct speaking. Darwin collected many things and was very intrigued by chemistry and gadgets. This fixation on certain topics and objects is another characteristic often seen in autistic people. He was a very visual thinker, as many autistic people think spatially and visually. Fitzgerald describes Darwin in this article as, “a rather obsessive-compulsive and ritualistic man”. Together, these characteristics seem to point to the conclusion that Darwin most likely had some form of autism.

http://autismmythbusters.com/general...tistic-people/

- - - Updated - - -

As far as I'm aware, Einstein actually didn't have autism (as in was diagnosed, or there being sufficient evidence to diagnose him in retrospect). I know there are a few psychologists that claim he was *, but from what I've read of the claims, those are not a far cry away from being pure guesswork. Usually with an agenda attached to the conclusion. The same is actually true for more people on your list - I don't mind autistic people not feeling like victims or some such, that's indeed a good thing, but why give false diagnoses to famous people? Rather disrespectful, imo. And to be honest, we shouldn't try to deny that actual autism is by definiton a neurodevelopmental disorder.

For that matter, for you point one...lets not open that can of worms, but just point out that in the context of society and politics - obviously not a disorder. In strictly scientific terms...it might very well be, actually. The jury is still out. But again, lets leave that one alone.


Edit: Maybe I should point out that having a few traits reminiscent of autism, does NOT make you autistic in the clinical sense.

Well I was clinically diagnosed with aspergers in Elementary School. I never considered myself unintelligent, I was however ashamed of hearing the word autistic until I started to get older and realize that there's nothing to be ashamed about aspergers or any low spectrum autism.

I have a hyper focus, a common trait of aspergers, this is why I never go that far away from the topics I talk about.

[Deleted]

Well my thing is low spectrum autism is not neccessarily a bad thing. High spectrum where people are nearly incapable of speech or social intereaction normally at any degree is usually bad

My point is that if you can choose between "not necessarily bad" and "guaranteed good", people tend to choose the latter. As compared to the situation today which can better be described as a coin flip and hope for the best. The only question is what is consider to be good and bad once people get a choice in it instead of having to accept the hand they were dealt.

[Techno-Druid]

My point is that if you can choose between "not necessarily bad" and "guaranteed good", people tend to choose the latter. As compared to the situation today which can better be described as a coin flip and hope for the best. The only question is what is consider to be good and bad once people get a choice in it instead of having to accept the hand they were dealt.

I understand, too much of anything is a bad thing for as cliché as that line is, it's largely true.

[TrumpIsPresident]

The flaw I see with this is that its something only the rich would utilize and couldn't ever possibly keep up with the skyrocketing rabbit like breeding rate of the poor.

So eventually these designer humans would run out of diversity in their own genetic circle and go extinct.

Or they'd have to start cloning each other via The Masterpiece Society.

[Sama-81]

http://autismmythbusters.com/general...tistic-people/

I stand by every word I wrote before, in regards to this. Insufficient evidence, by a mile. Theories are nice, and could be correct, but so could the ones stating that Darwin was in fact NOT autistic. If everything scientists thought was something based on unsubstantiated data and interpretations actually turned out to be that something, then my life in science would suddenly be so much easier...

[url]Well I was clinically diagnosed with aspergers in Elementary School. I never considered myself unintelligent, I was however ashamed of hearing the word autistic until I started to get older and realize that there's nothing to be ashamed about aspergers or any low spectrum autism.

I have a hyper focus, a common trait of aspergers, this is why I never go that far away from the topics I talk about.

I wouldn't assume you are unintelligent either, and it was not my intent to imply such a thing. Or any other, only that true autism is a disorder, and alas, someting negative. That doesn't mean that it has to have huge implications, especially not in this day and age. There are lots of people with some disorder or other, that you wouldn't realize have one unless they actually told you they do. Thank god for the 21st century, eh?

[Techno-Druid]

I stand by every word I wrote before, in regards to this. Insufficient evidence, by a mile. Theories are nice, and could be correct, but so could the ones stating that Darwin was in fact NOT autistic. If everything scientists thought was something based on unsubstantiated data and interpretations actually turned out to be that something, then my life in science would suddenly be so much easier...





I wouldn't assume you are unintelligent either, and it was not my intent to imply such a thing. Or any other, only that true autism is a disorder, and alas, someting negative. That doesn't mean that it has to have huge implications, especially not in this day and age. There are lots of people with some disorder or other, that you wouldn't realize have one unless they actually told you they do. Thank god for the 21st century, eh?

Yeah, we are reaching a very progressive state. Even many Islamic theocratic nations like Iran and slowly Saudi Arabia are coming over.

[Alefnir]

Then the very rich would have even more of an advantage over the very poor and eventually, they won't be distinguishable as the same species. Eventually, all human difference would be lost because (as video games show us) there is only one or two 'optimals'. Here's to certain people who frequent this forum not getting their way.

[Silversorrow]

One word on this topic "Gattaca"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca

Fairly accurate representation of what would happen IMO.

[Deleted]

Then the very rich would have even more of an advantage over the very poor and eventually, they won't be distinguishable as the same species. Eventually, all human difference would be lost because (as video games show us) there is only one or two 'optimals'. Here's to certain people who frequent this forum not getting their way.

Thats interesting yeah people will run with the cookie cutter build until patchday...
in our case it would be vulnerabillity to disease like in crop monocultures?

[Alefnir]

A 'perfect' world is an extremely boring one.

[Techno-Druid]

One word on this topic "Gattaca"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gattaca

Fairly accurate representation of what would happen IMO.

Probably a little like Gattaca but with less blatant discrimination and likely more colorful hair and more ridiculous shit some asshole would likely give their offspring...

[shadowmouse]

Gattaca? No, go for Schlock! http://www.schlockmercenary.com/2001-02-11