How far would you want science to go?

[The2ndWheel]

I'm at work, not much to do, so I figured I'd use one of the fruits of science to ask. What I mean by the question is, if it could be done to expand our average lifespans to 150 years, would that be something you'd like to see? Or something along the lines of completely modifying the genes of a child in the womb, to meet specific attributes. Maybe furthering the ability to mold the environment to our needs, in some kind of capacity. More work with food. Things like that. Not interested so much in the practicability of such things. It's more like asking someone if they were as wealthy as Gates, what would they do with the wealth?

[bryant69]

1. Be intersting to see what kind of responses you get

I'm of the opinion that I would like to see most of those things - I don't know about the modifying genes in the womb, although perhaps thats inevitable. But yeah, modifying the environment to our needs? I'm fine with that.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[slackmaster]

2. If they reanimate Ted Williams, that will be enough for me

[XemaSab]

3. The lifespan issue is a very sticky one

I think the current American lifespan is about on target, but we need to work more on quality of life than quantity.

For example, eliminating chronic diseases such as diabetes and asthma, arthritis and osteoporosis, birth defects, and problems such as MS, Parkinson's, and Altzheimer's would improve the quality of life for a lot of people, including the elderly.

[Crazy Dave]

4. 150 year lifespan?

They'd probably bump the retirement age to 149 then in order to collect social security. One thing I'd like to see personally is more cures for diseases developed than just treatments for disease. The balance in that area is tilted more towards return customers having to spend lots of money to buy medicines over many years just to stay alive versus giving them a cure to live a somewhat normal life.

[napi21]

5. I don't want to live to be 150! I don't even want to live to 100!

Things start to wear our after a certain age, and I totally agree with the "quality" v/s "quantity" another poster mentioned!

The most important things science can do is work on eliminating the debilitating deseases we see all around us.

[Javaman]

6. Damn it! Where the hell is my flying car!!! nt

[Caution]

7. These are more about practical applications of science

Personally, I want to see science be able to fundamentally explain the workings of the universe and of life.

The applications have a lot more to do with an ethical determination of what is right or wrong about a certain application.

All of what you mention are within the realm of scientific possibility.

150 years - Absolutely if we can retard the aging process as it pertains to phyiscal abilities and mental faculties

Modification of a child in the womb? Absolutely, but only as it pertains to major birth defects or genetic disease, certainly not in terms of physical appearance or many other "horror film" types of modifications

Environment modification? This is a tough one, because of the true complexity of the system, I honestly don't know if we could ever reach a stage when we could ethically make meaningful modifications simply due to the unknown long-term results.

[rock]

8. Technically, those are what Technology does

Science merely obtains the knowledge that makes it possible. I'm for Science all the way. We must be cautious and wise in our application of it though.

[Squeech]

9. Science fiction

has been thinking about these issues for a couple generations now.

One idea that's been dealt with a lot is transplants. A lot of books suggest that in the near future criminal organizations will make replacement organs available to rich people for a price. Larry Niven has several yarns where "organleggers," criminals who abduct careless citizens and chop them up for transplants, are a prominent enough problem to require a dedicated police organization.

More benignly, John Varley suggests a widespread use of therapeutic cloning: you deposit your DNA with your HMO, which grows replacement organs for you as needed. The one rigid rule is that there can only be one citizen walking around with a given genetic signature.

I don't know what to think. I'm really happy to believe in human progress, but there are unintended consequences. It's a good thing that we haven't had a flu epidemic in three generations (knock on wood), but now we die of subtler things that cause us to linger longer, in greater pain and less dignity: cancer, multiple sclerosis, lupus, and the rest of the autoimmune disorders.

[nosillies]

10. Could widen the gap

The first thing that springs to my mind is using genetic manipulation in the womb to widen the gap between the haves and have-nots. Rich people would be able to afford to make their children more attractive, more intelligent, stronger, etc. As if they didn't already have more advantages!

I am not afraid to admit some of my foibles! I have been known to see photos of the super-rich in the society pages or Vogue and similar publications, and think to myself "She may be rich, but she's ugly, and I'm more attractive than her!" Please don't take this away from me!!!!:evilgrin:

[patricia92243]

11. As long as freedom of choice is maintained - I say let science go as far

as it can. Then I can choose to have my child modified or I can choose to live to 150 or whatever.

The same is true for today. The people that grip about this and that have the freedom to choose NOT do do whatever it is they are gripping about.

[TheFriedPiper]

12. I'd be happy if they just found the gene that

turns people into mindless, frightened sheep that are afraid of whatever their political/religious leaders tell them to be afraid of.

Then we could squash it.

[thereismore]

13. You are confusing science with engineering.

Science is about understanding how things work. Science should go all the way of course. Applying our understanding to genetically alter a baby in the womb is engineering, eugenics in fact. It should never happen, unless the child carries a debilitating illness.

Consider this: I think it war right an good for man to understand quantum mechanics and relativity, but it wasn't right to use that knowledge to engineer niclear bombs. Hell, why stop there. It was right to understand basic laws of chemistry, but it wasn't right to make gunpowder for killing. The Chinese got it right - they knew gunpowder but never used it for weapons, just for fireworks.

In other words, we should understand everything, but we should not do everything just because we can.

[Boojatta]

14. More work with food.

I want to see a genetically engineered plant that contains all nutrients we need to eat in the right proportions for human beings. I want it to ripen like an avocado so that it can be eaten raw. Otherwise how could it supply vitamin C? Also, if it can be eaten raw then people who don't have a place to cook won't have a problem.

Ideally it would grow in soils that are unsuitable for other crops. It might provoke an increase in the market value of land that is currently not used for farming.

[mccoyn]

15. I'm going to go farther than others.

I think, that there will be a time in the distant future when we can and should modify our genes to make ourselves more than human. We have evolved to survive on earth. Our intelligence isn't much more than what is useful in adapting to our changing environment. We can't imagine what 11 dimensional space is like. We can't travel to the stars in a lifetime. We can't watch macro-evolution unfold. There are so many experiences that are beyond our human capabilities.

I do thing we are a long, long way off from being able to do these things. Even given the amazing pace of technology we are witnessing today. It could be hundreds of years, but I hope to be alive then.

[Posteritatis]

24. I'm with you there, I think (n/t)

[LiberalEsto]

16. End poverty

and clean up the environment

[Boojatta]

19. "End poverty" doesn't sound like a goal for science.

You could hire brilliant scientific minds, supply them with capital, and ask them to create just one profitable enterprise. They might spend the seed money long before the enterprise can start making profits.

[LiberalEsto]

22. Well, there are ways to help people in poverty

I'm sure science can find ways to help people can raise enough food to feed themselves, make their own energy, purify their drinking water, house themselves in economical and sustainable shelters, and protect them from ravaging diseases.

[Bandit]

17. Couldn't we somehow establish a super race of Aryan people?

Shouldn't that be the goal of our great fatherland?..just saying..

[bryant69]

18. Maybe you'd prefer we live in environmentally sound mud huts

[Bandit]

21. They actually have a name and are made from old tires

Totally off the grid so completely self contained. They are in all fifty states and their name is Earth Ships
http://www.earthship.org/

[bryant69]

25. And how many Americans could move into these tire huts?

That's the thing that gets me about people who want us to go backwards - it pretty much implies that a certain number of us are going to have to be thrown over board.

[Warren DeMontague]

26. A website? Shouldn't they be getting the information out by smoke signal?

Or hemp rope telegraph wire?

[Warren DeMontague]

20. Terraform the Moon and Mars

Honestly, I'd just like to move somewhere where there aren't so many Monster Truck Driving Jesus freaks.

[slackmaster]

28. Monster truck pull on the Moon sounds like a hoot

Where do I sign up?

[Posteritatis]

23. You name it, I'd probably like to see it. (n/t)

[RagAss]

27. Cripes...I'd be happy just to see us walk on the moon again.....

if indeed we ever did...... :tinfoilhat: