Carregue numa fotografia para ir para os Livros Google.
A carregar... Altered Inheritance: CRISPR and the Ethics of Human Genome Editingpor Françoise Baylis
Nenhum(a) A carregar...
Adira ao LibraryThing para descobrir se irá gostar deste livro. Ainda não há conversas na Discussão sobre este livro. sem crÃticas | adicionar uma crÃtica
Prémios
"With the advent of CRISPR gene-editing technology, designer babies have become a reality. Françoise Baylis insists that scientists alone cannot decide the terms of this new era in human evolution. Members of the public, with diverse interests and perspectives, must have a role in determining our future as a species."--Publisher Não foram encontradas descrições de bibliotecas. |
Current DiscussionsNenhum(a)
Google Books — A carregar... GénerosSistema Decimal de Melvil (DDC)576.5Natural sciences and mathematics Life Sciences, Biology Genetics and evolution GeneticsClassificação da Biblioteca do Congresso dos EUA (LCC)AvaliaçãoMédia:
É você?Torne-se num Autor LibraryThing. |
some thoughts in or occasioned by this book:
* the treatment versus enhancement distinction is not helpful, fails to illuminate even simple examples like making people less susceptible to alcoholism
* we can speak of "species-typical capabilities" like hearing and vision, and that phrasing sidesteps some of the important but separable controversies around how we build a world hostile to those with species-atypical endowments
* author mentions that editing out some species-atypical traits (eg deafness) will dwindle base of support for the already inadequate accommodations society makes for those traits. am thinking of this like ideal versus non-ideal theories of justice, where you must be mindful of a policy feedback loop.
* another example: we do not want to edit next generation to accommodate a racist society. the focus should be on making society not racist. it seems to me one way to fill in the argument here is to point out that "treatment" here depends on diagnosis: eg, on one leftwing view racialization is symptomatic of racism, like fever is of the flu.
* overly gene-centric view is generating a lot of the bad ideas about gene-editing. genes are not "causing" income inequality, political institutions are. good news: we don't need cutting edge science to do "policy-editing."
* parents are already wanting to bring all their negative-sum status competitions to the genetic arena: making next generation 6" taller, etc. this is both the most likely and dumbest problem in the medium term.
* if we cannot get universal access in place, cooperation/cohesion likely to break down, both within and between societies
* author doesn't discuss but what is "desirable" may itself be a function of genome, so we get a very unpredictable path dependence: first we edit this gene, then next generation consequently has new desire to edit another gene, and so on perhaps so gradually as to be imperceptible. ( )