On The Brink Of Artificial Life

business week ^ | 6/25/07 | NEWS & INSIGHTS

[Frank_Discussion]

Seriously, I don’t know what to make of this.

1. It is an abomination to try, or;
2. We are made in God’s image, so why not try?

There is a logical argument to make for both paths, I think. I don’t think it is as simple a judgement to make as either side would like it to be.

[gcruse]

“This is the question for our time: What is science unbound by morality?”

Nuclear medicine and nuclear weapons. They come from the same research.

[M1Tanker]

Much of our early genetic research came from NAZI experiments also. Thousands of twins, people with genetic defects, and “peculiarities” died in NAZI Death Camps as they were studied to death. In this case we applied morality to future research on the subject. Now that we can connect genes like “tinker toys” (oversimplification), will science have to moral imperative to benefit humanity, or serve other ends?

The USSR had a major accident involving the release of Anthrax. Hundreds died at a minimum. How many were studied with the goal not of curing them, but of perfecting the weapon?

This makes me wonder about all of these “new” diseases appearing out of China. Maybe their scientists, unbound by morality, have already made synthetic organisms.

As for nuclear weapons (which the US, Japan, and Germany were all working on), these weapons were known to be very destructive only after testing. The morality came in two forms: (1)We need to stop the war or we will have to invade Japan with extreme casualties. (2)We need to find something better for this technology to do.

[gcruse]

Inasmuch as you acknowledge the inability to predict where research will lead, how does one determine when to put the clamp of morality on science?

I think one of the most dangerous experiments ever done was Jenner’s injection of people with cowpox to see if smallpox immunity could be achieved. Yet without it, imagine the deaths...

[the final gentleman]

Ok wise guys, you are life. What are you and why are you here?

[M1Tanker]

And that is the point of my question. I did not expect an easy answer. I do not think there is one. However, like the rest of morality and philosophy, the difficult questions must be asked over and over.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

It’s going to happen, eventually, man will create an artificial construct that will have all the prerequisites to be human except for being born of the union of man and woman. Two arms, two legs, head on top, two eyes, capable of reason, etc. For all intents and purposes humanoid if not truly human.

It may not be The West that does it, it may be some rogue corporation who starts turning out laborers to run factories in a third world craphole. If they get there first, they will be positioned to set the standard by which these constructs are measured. If they are created as slaves, thats the way the will be treated.

If we allow someone else to spearhead the great gene rush, they will set the standard by which all living artifacts are judged. We have to get ahead of that and set a standard that requires anything created by man in the humaniform to be given the rights and protections extended to born in the womb humans.

If we do that, we may avoid being cursed by our constructs as Lucifer’s minions. If we fail to act early enough, I think your statement about us becoming The Devil will be close to the mark.

[aruanan]

It won't be much to look at—a tiny bacterium with only a few hundred genes.

And it won't be an artificial organism. It will be a pre-existing bacterium into which has been introduced a genome constructed from bits and pieces of other genomes. They are not constructing a single cell and all of its cellular machinary from scratch.

[Flavius]

yet

[mkjessup]

I'm sure it can be done once we get a grasp on manipulating the other 8 (or is it 11) dimensions of reality. You know we already have a glimpse of just how much is hidden from us with the discovery of what is called "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy". The measurable, observable universe of ordinary matter and energy is at most less than 5% of the whole.

Of course we'll get a 'grasp' on all those dimensions and energies you speak of.

Indeed, 'ye shall be as gods', right?

[unspun]

"Bright?"

Hm.....

[mkjessup]

Ok wise guys, you are life. What are you and why are you here?

I (like each and every one of us) was created in the Image of the Almighty God.

As to why I'm here, He already knows.

[AmericaUnited]

” When we can synthesize life, it makes the notion of a living being less special.’

Only to an ignorant idiot. The huge, huge difference between us and other lifeforms is that we have souls. When these "geniuses" can create life with a soul, then I'll give some some credit.

[M1Tanker]

We have to get ahead of that and set a standard that requires anything created by man in the humaniform to be given the rights and protections extended to born in the womb humans.

If we do that, we may avoid being cursed by our constructs as Lucifer’s minions.

And that excellent observation is the point I wanted to make.

[hosepipe]

Amazing that man appears to have evolved to believe in God and copy Gods handiwork(maybe).. is all the more special..

Copy cats...

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOL!

[ndt]

"So .. are you concluding He meant for us to discover how to create humans ..??"

Maybe you are laking the necessary skills, but I'm pretty competent at creating humans now.

[CyberAnt]

LOL! You missed the point.

In order to “create” - you have to have 2 participants and a creator. Without the creator .. there’s no chance for a creation to take place .. no matter what humans might do.

And here all the time you thought it was you!!

[ndt]

"In order to “create” - you have to have 2 participants and a creator."

You seem to want this to be a threesome.

There is a danger when pinning a religious truth on an easily disprovable claim and I fear that is what you are doing in this case. If they turn around and produce and new life form in the next few months, does that mean there is no "creator", beyond Craig that is?