semi-synthetic organism

[water]

with an expanded genetic alphabet.

 

Is this only the beginning of...what exactly?

[jt07]

Wow, that's cool!

[water]

Wow, that's cool!

But what does it mean pooh?

[Stickler]

They already gave us cyborg sperm cells:

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/scientists-create-a-controlled-cyborg-sperm-that-can-sw-1481503095

Now they are actually making bacteria...

I, for one, welcome our new protozoan overlords...

[water]

I found this explanation:

 

They used unnatural(man-made) base pairs and were able to have the cell's machinery incorporate them into replicating plasmids (small circular pieces of DNA). They did not create life. The incorportaed base pairs, while transcribed, were not translated (used to code for a protein, which is on of the primary reasons for a given nucleotide sequence. In my interpretation, what they have shown is that it is conceivable that life could arise elsewhere in the universe using different purines and pyrimidines than the A/t and C/G pairs we are used to here on earth.

In the past, other unnatural bases (nucleoside analogues) have been used to treat cancer, HIV and Hepatitis B with varying degrees of success. However, in their case, they were meant to terminate a nascent chain using merely a hydrogen atom instead of an hydroxyl group (Oxygen and Hydrogen) which is necessary for chain elongation.

[jt07]

Wow, that's cool!

But what does it mean pooh?

I don't know what it means, but it would be nice if they could create an intelligent being.

[water]

 

 

Wow, that's cool!

But what does it mean pooh?

 

I don't know what it means, but it would be nice if they could create an intelligent being.

 

 

really? I am not sure how I feel about that. it just seems, a bit, creepy?

[jt07]

Why do you find that creepy? Wouldn't it be cool to have a whole new species originated by humans? 

[water]

Why do you find that creepy? Wouldn't it be cool to have a whole new species originated by humans? 

 

well...no

 

I guess I think humans have too much, ummm, evil(?) to want them to create another species.

 

I would LOVE to for humans to find another species on another planet. that would be way cool.

[jt07]

Given that humans have never recognized the full rights of another species, would we be justified in making slaves of a species we found on another planet? 

 

It can be argued that horses were at one time slaves. What if we created a species in the laboratory whose sole purpose were to be slaves?

 

What if we created a species in the lab whose whole purpose were to be soldiers?

 

I mean, the possibilities are endless.

[Stickler]

I'd be afraid of what we'd do to a novel species. Our track record with other ones and our own sucks.

[bobhope74]

this creeps me out also it creeps me out alot

correct me if im wrong but i allways thought the word synthetic meant man made

man made lifeform?

i dont bel ieve in that,i dont want to get too religous i dont consider myself super religous,but this seems to fall whell into the realm of man playing god and man pretending to be god

something has to be sacred if nothings sacred forget it,it may be only a matter of time before human beings destroy them selves ,but i think this search for a matierial root of all life or whatever it is has the potential to accelerate our self destruction even more than the other great scientific achievment of splitting the atom,i dont know thats just me

[jt07]

this creeps me out also it creeps me out alot

correct me if im wrong but i allways thought the word synthetic meant man made

man made lifeform?

i dont bel ieve in that,i dont want to get too religous i dont consider myself super religous,but this seems to fall whell into the realm of man playing god and man pretending to be god

something has to be sacred if nothings sacred forget it,it may be only a matter of time before human beings destroy them selves ,but i think this search for a matierial root of all life or whatever it is has the potential to accelerate our self destruction even more than the other great scientific achievment of splitting the atom,i dont know thats just me

Would it be a bad thing if humans created a superior species that supplanted us?

[water]

 

Would it be a bad thing if humans created a superior species that supplanted us?

 

This is exactly what freaks me out I think.

 

YOu hit the nail on the species head.

[Stickler]

Given that humans have never recognized the full rights of another species, would we be justified in making slaves of a species we found on another planet? 

 .

Um, no. Any more than we were justified in enslaving our own species' members.

 

What if we created a species in the lab whose whole purpose were to be soldiers?

 .

They'd turn on us, methinks. The optimal survival decision is to avoid battle, I suspect an intelligent soldier-species would stop fighting each other and fight us instead. Better stick with robots.

Would it be a bad thing if humans created a superior species that supplanted us?

This is exactly what freaks me out I think.

 

YOu hit the nail on the species head.

We'll make great pets?

[jt07]

 

Given that humans have never recognized the full rights of another species, would we be justified in making slaves of a species we found on another planet? 

 .

Um, no. Any more than we were justified in enslaving our own species' members.

 

 

What possible moral precedent do you have for making that statement?

[jt07]

Would it be a bad thing if humans created a superior species that supplanted us?

This is exactly what freaks me out I think.

 

YOu hit the nail on the species head.

See, I don't understand why that freaks you out. If a species is superior, then it's superior. We've had our time in the sun.

[water]

 

 

What if we created a species in the lab whose whole purpose were to be soldiers?

 .

They'd turn on us, methinks. The optimal survival decision is to avoid battle, I suspect an intelligent soldier-species would stop fighting each other and fight us instead. Better stick with robots.

 

Would it be a bad thing if humans created a superior species that supplanted us?

This is exactly what freaks me out I think.

 

YOu hit the nail on the species head.

We'll make great pets?

 

 

 

I think this was done on the Outer Limits. 

 

 

Would it be a bad thing if humans created a superior species that supplanted us?

This is exactly what freaks me out I think.

 

YOu hit the nail on the species head.

 

See, I don't understand why that freaks you out. If a species is superior, then it's superior. We've had our time in the sun.

 

 

the problem is with the word superior.

 

we are not superior in my view to any animal.

 

yeah, we can use our thumbs and our brains are bigger, but whales may be  more intelligent and we dont' even bother to find that out before we slaughter the whole species.

 

So it's as if a hellish insect created another species of even more hellishable insects.

[water]

 

We've had our time in the sun.

 

 

I do agree with this statement, wholeheartedly.

 

we are ruining our plaent right now. 

 

My 7th grade teacher many decades ago  told us that "the greenhouse gas effect" was already irreversible.

 

Now, the president says, "ok, let's do something!"

 

It's too late.

Edited May 8, 2014 by water

[jt07]

This is a GREAT topic. It raises a lot of interesting philosophical questions.

 

Personally, I see nothing wrong with pursuing knowledge even if that knowledge is creating other species. The only debatable part is how that knowledge would be used. I do not agree that the possibility that it can be misused should be a justification for remaining ignorant, however.

[water]

This is a GREAT topic. It raises a lot of interesting philosophical questions.

 

Personally, I see nothing wrong with pursuing knowledge even if that knowledge is creating other species. The only debatable part is how that knowledge would be used. I do not agree that the possibility that it can be misused should be a justification for remaining ignorant, however.

good point.

[bobhope74]

but see thats the the thing i believe arrogance IS a form of arrogance and i cant think of any thing more arrogant than man trying to play god and create lifeforms in the laboratory to be used for his own selfish purposes listen i dont understand the science but i understand its understandable man can pretty much understand the physical laws that underly physical existence and can change the natural coarse of things in many little ways (personally i believe a "superior" intelligencenature or whatever will eventually correct those things,whier thier really off)but anyway my point is this and i know its not all that profound and has been said many times already,but for one thing our current cultur did not invent science we inherited what we know from thousands of years of human observation phillosophy,trial and error,exc and built on that yet in a very very short period of time have brought the planet to the brink of destruction

i believe the reoson for this is mans arrogance

and i think civilizations before ours avoided this because thier religous belief systems prevented them.

i also suspect science is as ignorant now with this genetic stuff as they were with all the poisnous elements they released into the ecosystem(and also lack the knowledge that they dont know which in itself is knowledge)and arrogantly think they know everything because they have mastered to some extent, one possible reality as far as man creating a lifeform that hasnt occured naturally in the right context ,i dont f-ing know but the firste thing i thought of was perhaps hes creating the breeding ground for a virus that wasnt meant to occur yet but im sure some more resourceful minds could come up with more creativew scenarios

anyway i do find that stuff scary partly due to ignorance but not wholly due to ignorance

[Stickler]

Given that humans have never recognized the full rights of another species, would we be justified in making slaves of a species we found on another planet?

.

Um, no. Any more than we were justified in enslaving our own species' members.

What possible moral precedent do you have for making that statement?Um, civil war?

I presume you were talking about a fairly intelligent species. But I'm not certain that matters.

I don't really feel lik rehashing the perennial vegan board arguments about enslaving animals, suffice it to say enslaving and eating animals or performing experiments on them does bother me.

I am glad I don't have to eat animals. Some people do need to eat animal protein for health reasons.

I do, however, take meds for which a lot of rats died. Lots of meds, both ones to keep me sane and ones to keep my lungs pried open. At least I'm not likely to pop out a copy of me, so there is that.

My morals are not logical, they are based on what turns my stomach.

But I don't live a perfect life by any stretch, or I'd bicycle everywhere and have no electricity. So I'll admit to some hypocrisy.

The idea of enslaving an alien race turns my stomach. It bothers me. So does the idea of keeping lions in small cages or lopping off the tails of dairy cows. Or enslaving humans. Or debeaking chickens..and chickens are stupid,stupid creatures.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Stickler

[Stickler]

Now,enslaving nonsentient carrots, or e. Coli, or yeast cultures... that does not bother me so much.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Stickler

[confused]

I mis-read the title. Was wondering what a synthetic orgasm was.

If a man made organism was sold as food, would you eat it?

I don't like the idea of enslavement of anyone natural or man made.

[Stickler]

I mis-read the title. Was wondering what a synthetic orgasm was.

If a man made organism was sold as food, would you eat it?

I don't like the idea of enslavement of anyone natural or man made.

I'm already eating genetically-modified foods...not that I voted for that or anything...O.o

[water]

I mis-read the title. Was wondering what a synthetic orgasm was.

 

I mis-read the title once myself.

[jt07]

 

 

 

Given that humans have never recognized the full rights of another species, would we be justified in making slaves of a species we found on another planet?

.

Um, no. Any more than we were justified in enslaving our own species' members.

What possible moral precedent do you have for making that statement? Um, civil war?

I presume you were talking about a fairly intelligent species. But I'm not certain that matters.

 

No. I don't really want to rehash the reasons for the Civil War but insofar as it was fought for freedom, it was fought for freedom of members of our own species. We have never recognized the rights of another species, not even our closest relatives the apes.

 

As per our current morality, we are totally justified in enslaving extraterestial aliens.

[jt07]

but see thats the the thing i believe arrogance IS a form of arrogance and i cant think of any thing more arrogant than man trying to play god and create lifeforms in the laboratory to be used for his own selfish purposes listen i dont understand the science but i understand its understandable man can pretty much understand the physical laws that underly physical existence and can change the natural coarse of things in many little ways (personally i believe a "superior" intelligencenature or whatever will eventually correct those things,whier thier really off)but anyway my point is this and i know its not all that profound and has been said many times already,but for one thing our current cultur did not invent science we inherited what we know from thousands of years of human observation phillosophy,trial and error,exc and built on that yet in a very very short period of time have brought the planet to the brink of destruction

i believe the reoson for this is mans arrogance

and i think civilizations before ours avoided this because thier religous belief systems prevented them.

i also suspect science is as ignorant now with this genetic stuff as they were with all the poisnous elements they released into the ecosystem(and also lack the knowledge that they dont know which in itself is knowledge)and arrogantly think they know everything because they have mastered to some extent, one possible reality as far as man creating a lifeform that hasnt occured naturally in the right context ,i dont f-ing know but the firste thing i thought of was perhaps hes creating the breeding ground for a virus that wasnt meant to occur yet but im sure some more resourceful minds could come up with more creativew scenarios

anyway i do find that stuff scary partly due to ignorance but not wholly due to ignorance

 

I want to deal with the "man trying to play God" argument. Wasn't man playing God by splitting the atom thereby converting one element into another? Wasn't man playing God by smashing two atoms together to create wholly new elements that didn't exist in nature until man created it in the laboratory? What about creating airplanes that fly when people who don't have wings were obviously not meant to fly? What about automobiles? The list goes on.

 

The point is that all progress in human knowledge and practice has been made by "man playing God."

[sonicwhite]

Wouldn't it be sad if we as humans that make mistakes and some of us are just plan evil made something that was living. It has feelings sight or whatever.....Then we turn on it and abuse it and treat it like crap....That is why I think that God is never going to really give us that much power unless He gives us over to them........Just a thought.

Edited May 9, 2014 by sonicwhite

[water]

Wouldn't it be sad if we as humans that make mistakes and some of us are just plan evil made something that was living. It has feelings sight or whatever.....Then we turn on it and abuse it and treat it like crap....That is why I think that God is never going to really give us that much power unless He gives us over to them........Just a thought.

 

Don't know about the God part but I totally agree that we could create something and then abuse it.

we do that now.

people make babies and abuse them from birth.

why would humans treat this new human any different?

 

I don't think creating life is the same as creating airplanes that fly, or robots that vacuum, or bombs that burst.

 

Life is different. Sentient being.

[jt07]

I don't think creating life is the same as creating airplanes that fly, or robots that vacuum, or bombs that burst.

 

Life is different. Sentient being.

 

 

I respectfully disagree. The only reasons I've ever heard why life is different are based on religious convictions or gut feelings. From a purely scientific perspective its all the same. 

Edited May 10, 2014 by jt07

[water]

 

I don't think creating life is the same as creating airplanes that fly, or robots that vacuum, or bombs that burst.

 

Life is different. Sentient being.

 

 

I respectfully disagree. The only reasons I've ever heard why life is different are based on religious convictions or gut feelings. From a purely scientific perspective its all the same. 

 

 

I am not sure I understand. 

 

Are you saying that inanimate objects are not different from plants or animals or humans?

Sometimes I do wonder about rocks.  I collect rocks, bones, shells. They seem very real and alive to me. 

[jt07]

It's all matter. The only difference is that living things are highly organized matter.

[water]

It's all matter. The only difference is that living things are highly organized matter.

 

Not me. I am a very highly unorganized matter.

[jt07]

I should point out that what I said before is from a scientific perspective. It has to be such in order to maintain objectivity. Of course, from a human perspective they are different. However, while ethics and religion should inform how we use such technology, they should not get to veto the acquisition of knowledge itself ... if they did, we'd still be living in the dark ages.

[sonicwhite]

The thing is there is to MUCH order for there not to be a God.....There is even order in disorder.....I'm sorry I'm not trying to debate......I just think that we as humans who if we had enough power would destroy ourselves........It really looks like a possibility to me.....Some carasmatic madman is going to flip his lid like Hitler and try to take over the world.....History repeats itself folks and our history well it's not the cleanest.

[bobhope74]

water thanks for this topic,and thanks all the other posters and for tolerating my rant and let me apologise ahead of time its just one of those topics its funny because at one point i seemed to here about genetics and the genome project all the time and thought nothing of its like i didnt think it was real it still seems so strange

jt07 thanks for the attension interesting points and good qeustions im not an expert

the statement about man playing god was refering to genetic engineering and human cloning i didnt invent that phrase to describe human cloning its a common sentiment

i know i got alittle off topic but those were the main ones also the idea of custom designing and genetically engineering humans

i dont think airplanes automobiles and bombs are in the same catagory

i believe,or feel genetic engineering and human cloneing

is science tresspassing into the territory of religeon and mystery

and its science imposeing its beliefe that god and the spiritual realm is a myth or make believe as if religeon is a child and science the adult when if anything its the other way around

so for what its worth just a thought

inna a nutshell

most of technology is about saving time and speeding things up

the telephone eliminates the need for human contact,and speeds exchange of information airplains and automobiles condense trips into days,an hours that once took monthes and years,machines,factorys,microwaves,calculators

television effectivly advertisedand debriefed the public on whatever the latest thing was and what they should do and think so they behave inna quicker and more effecient manner words became more condensed and contained more information and sped up the brains and all of these things increased dependencie on technology not just for convenience but eventually in order just to survive

and so it was sciences rise to power

and the split between science and religeon grew

and modern man was personified by the scientist w/ technical know how to operate all the fastly accumulating devices and contraptions

but he was loseing the wisdom that came from religeon or some kind of spirituality and science moved to fill the void of what the religeous man already instinctivly knew w/ technical know how

but man(and science)especially needed the wisdom or some kind of spirituality when it came to the harsh fact of his own mortality

and science moved to fill the void w/ a kind of declaration of war on disease and ultimatly on death itself and created the phantasy that physical immortality was possible and obtainable(also id like to add,if it was possible it would be much less attractive than the phantasy,you could be shure of that but any way)long story short discovery of DNA ok fast forward

come to find out all this speeding up had unforseen conseqeunces,severe ones threatening the harmonious climate of the earth itself,drugged cattle and time saving chemicals leftthe soil depleted and the countrys food supply compromised

now science wants to speed up evolutionary changes that naturally,in"nature"

gradually occur over MILLIONS of years and condense it into the space of a few DECADES science has the technical know how to do this but lacks the wisdom to pedict the conseqeunces

in fact the conseqeunces are unpredictable and unforseeable

science wants to custom design and genetically engineer humam beings,it wants to decide which genes are good and which ones to be eliminated

not only do they lack the wisdom to make these kind of determinations, but even whats considered bad genes is part of human genetic diversity that could easily be valuable or vital in an unforseeable future

not only are tt5he conseqeunces unpredictable and unforseeable,they are irreversable! but thats what they want to do

furthermore in the current climate all i here about isw the detierioration of the moral fiber of society,scandals and abuses of power not only does he lack the wisdom

man in his current stage of developement is not morally fit to responsibly use this technology

thats how it seems to me

like i said im not an expert and i think this is an important topic and thier many ppl who could say it much better than i can so a quote by Dr.Leon Kass

"We have paid some high prices for the technological conquest of nature,but none perhaps so high as the intellectual and spiritual cost of seeing nature as mere material for our manipulation,exploitation and transformation.With the powers for biological engineering now gathering,there will be splendid new oppurtunities for a similar degradation of our view of man.Indeed,we are already witnessing the erosion of our idea of man as something splendid or devine,as a creature with freedom and dignity.And clearly,if we come to see our selves as meat,then meat we shall become.The new technologys for human engineering may well be"the transition to a wholly new path of evolution."They may,therefore,mark the end of human life as we and all other humans know it.It is possible that the non-human life that may take our place will in some sense be superior-though i personally think it most unlikely,and certainly not demonstrable.IN eithercase,we are ourselves human beings;therefore,it is proper for us to have a proprietary interest in our survival,and in our survival AS human beings.This is a difficult enough task without having to confront the prospect of a utopian,constant remaking of our biological nature with all-powerful means but with no end in view.

[Squish]

Hmm, I'm not totally sure I agree with you that the advances in science and technology that enable humans to biologically or genetically engineer things has come with a loss of wisdom, or even spirituality. I'm not going to go into the whole "science is the new religion" thing. Science is not religion. But I wouldn't say that it has an intellectual or spiritual cost any more than music does.

 

I've been doing a degree in biology and one of the reasons I've pursued it and am planning to continue to post-grad level is because studying (and experimenting with!) the natural world in all of its diversity and nuances and contradictions gives me an almost spiritual sense of being connected to every other living thing on the planet.

 

It's not just me who experiences this. I'll quote (the clergyman turned agnostic) Darwin:

 

The last paragraph of On The Origin of Species:

 

It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent upon each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with Reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the conditions of life and from use and disuse: a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.

 

I mis-read the title. Was wondering what a synthetic orgasm was.

If a man made organism was sold as food, would you eat it?

I don't like the idea of enslavement of anyone natural or man made.

 

I think it's quite hard to avoid eating organisms that have been drastically changed from their wild ancestors and enslaved by man!

 

We humans have been messing with the natural world for a good 10,000 years (since domesticating and enslaving and essentially creating many species of animals and plants). It isn't a new thing. Biological technologies can be used to help as well as harm. It's the same with physics - splitting the atom and creating vast stores of nuclear warheads made of polonium and enriched uranium - that's not exactly natural. But radiation therapy has cured an awful lot of cancers. Chemistry too, that'll create fantastic and useful synthetic materials but also WMDs like nerve gas.

 

Like jt07 said, you need ethics to decide what to do with technology and knowledge. I'd add a legislative process governed by a democracy of informed citizens, rather than religion. You can't really leave it up to the individual; not in a world where people will abuse children and animals if left to their own devices.

[confused]

Hmm, I'm not totally sure I agree with you that the advances in science and technology that enable humans to biologically or genetically engineer things has come with a loss of wisdom, or even spirituality. I'm not going to go into the whole "science is the new religion" thing. Science is not religion. But I wouldn't say that it has an intellectual or spiritual cost any more than music does.

 

I've been doing a degree in biology and one of the reasons I've pursued it and am planning to continue to post-grad level is because studying (and experimenting with!) the natural world in all of its diversity and nuances and contradictions gives me an almost spiritual sense of being connected to every other living thing on the planet.

 

It's not just me who experiences this. I'll quote (the clergyman turned agnostic) Darwin:

 

The last paragraph of On The Origin of Species:

 

It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent upon each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with Reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the conditions of life and from use and disuse: a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms. Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.

 

I mis-read the title. Was wondering what a synthetic orgasm was.

If a man made organism was sold as food, would you eat it?

I don't like the idea of enslavement of anyone natural or man made.

 

I think it's quite hard to avoid eating organisms that have been drastically changed from their wild ancestors and enslaved by man!

 

.

Point taken.

[Squish]

Confused: It's kind of sad, isn't it?

[confused]

Yes, it is.