[ExI] Limits of human modification

[William Flynn Wallace]

 The subjective measure would be a test of well-being.

How about using happiness as a test of gene modification?  It can be
predicted well.  Just add a chromosome 21 and you have Down's Syndrome.
Happiest people in the world - sunny.  Average IQ = 25.

Plenty of highly creative people have been manic-depressive and ultimately
killed themselves, and sometimes others.  Would they have been the same
without the manic-depression?

And don't we often say "Gee, that person had all the advantages.  Why are
they so unhappy?"

Group X may be happier on the average than Group Z, but predicting
individual happiness (or anything else) is just impossible.

​Psychology is a very long way from individual prediction.​

Ideal would be for the genetic manipulation to be reversible, so that the
affected person could choose their own modification, but in most cases this
will be impossible, I assume.  Better is if the improvement can be made in
the person's adulthood, allowing choice and preventing problems of consent.

​I like to speculate as much as anyone, but now we know so little.  We have
invented the wheel but are very far from an Indy car.

bill w​


On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Chris Hibbert <hibbert at mydruthers.com>
wrote:

>
> I think that the most appropriate test for permissibility of human
>> germline modifications should be a composite of predicted net impact
>> on social utility assessed by a subjective measure and an objective
>> measure.
>>
>> The objective measure would be a suitable econometric instrument,
>> such as per capita GDP. Any modification that increases GDP in the
>> long term or is GDP-neutral should be allowed, unless it fails the
>> subjective part of the test. Of course, the same modification could
>> differentially impact GDP in various situations, so the
>> permissibility of a modification would be subject to review. A
>> first-generation IQ boost could become a net drag on the economy
>> where third-generation boost is needed for an entry job, so it might
>> become unacceptable. Sponsors of a modification could pre-pay for a
>> GDP-negative modification, for example contributing to a fund which
>> would reimburse for losses attributable to the modification.
>>
>> The subjective measure would be a test of well-being. Modifications
>> that reduce predicted well-being below baseline of the unmodified
>> genotype should be disallowed.
>>
>
> Hmm. These seems like reasonable things to think about before you unleash
> something on your progeny and the world, but they seem extremely difficult
> to measure in an objective way by a global police force (or even a benign
> scientific overseer). Even trying to distinguish the econometric as
> objective and the well-being as subjective seems fraught with problems.
> It's somewhat true that we have instruments for measuring these kinds of
> outcomes across societies, but I don't think anyone has done anything
> approaching a respectable job of analyzing them prospectively for proposals
> that haven't been implemented yet.
>
> So, as I said, it seems reasonable, so ask someone who has developed
> germline techniques, and is considering applying them to himself or to
> paying customers or volunteers, to consider the plausible consequences out
> to the third or fourth generation at least. And perhaps this is a
> reasonable approach to recommend that institutional review boards take, as
> long as they have the ability to consider such questions in a civil manner.
> But hoping that this will be done in a way that politicians or the public
> can agree on the outcome seems unlikely to be fruitful.
>
> Chris
> --
> The government's efforts to expand "access" to care while limiting
> costs are like blowing up a balloon while simultaneously squeezing
> it.  The balloon continues to inflate, but in misshapen form.
>     ---David Goldhill
>
> Chris Hibbert
> hibbert at mydruthers.com
> http://mydruthers.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20151123/e8469b6d/attachment.html>