Should we create them? It’s an interesting ethical dilemma.
10 thoughts on “Neo-Neanderthals”
Don’t we already have plenty of those? 😉
I suspect synthesized biological intelligences will first come from augmenting animals rather than trying to build quasi-humans. Not that I expect this to happen in my lifetime, but then I didn’t expect cloning to happen either.
It would certainly make the GEICO commercials more realistic.
Scientifically speaking, the most immediate experiment of interest would be to see if a chimpanzee could be genetically engineered to have an analogue of the human genes for speech. The ethical issues would be less, since it would not be raising the intelligence of the animal per se; it would just be giving it a different mode of expression in addition to sign language.
“Scientifically speaking, the most immediate experiment of interest would be to see if a chimpanzee could be genetically engineered to have an analogue of the human genes for speech.”
No intelligence for Apes. If Charleton Heston taught us anything…..
Seems to me that at worst, you’d be creating a human suffering from effects similar to mild Down’s syndrome and muteness, but with a life span and fertility comparable to a normal human (and strong enough to do good manual labor). That’s a lot of responsibility, but not excessively so for parents (especially those supported by an organization). I recommend doing it.
First, you’d get a lot of insight into what Homo Neanderthalensis was (this is a possible gaze into our past). Second, you’d create a new form of life, but in a way that is likely to minimize problems. An intelligence that is very close to us, physically and mentally is far less likely to experience compatibility problems than a completely alien organism or construct. Since we’re going to create intelligences anyway, it is better to start scoping out the minefield, ethical and otherwise, with a relatively safe and compatible intelligence.
It would certainly make the GEICO commercials more realistic.
I’m thinking there would be a market for more intelligent pets and work animals (guard dogs?).
Just don’t give cats hands. You know this wouldn’t end well.
Just don’t give cats hands. You know this wouldn’t end well.
They’re already pretty adept with their paws as is (at least mine are). What would worry me much more is cats with wings.
Reminds me of the twilight zone where the locals welcome the Earth astronauts and build them a home. They find themselves locked in. Pulling back the drapes they find a crowd of locals staring at them, no doubt with a sign that says, ‘please don’t feed the humans.’
It doesn’t sound like they will be able to clone a neaderthal anytime soon, but it would certainly be interesting if they could. The genie is definitely out of the bottle.
Just because we can make a slave race, doesn’t mean we should! Sorry, but creating a race of near-humans for “manual labor” and “knowledge” would open too many worm cans.
Just one–the slave labor would eliminate the job market for the working poor who have few skills. There are enough unemployed people out there already.
Here’s another–why stop with proto-humans? Why not “experiment” on actual human tissues? Results could be wonderful, but far too open to abuse.
All right, fire away…
It seems to me that we should be accentuating the differences between humanity (and thus, personhood) and the beasts, not blurring the line. And that the “robots” in R.U.R. were actually biological, not mechanical.
Don’t we already have plenty of those? 😉
I suspect synthesized biological intelligences will first come from augmenting animals rather than trying to build quasi-humans. Not that I expect this to happen in my lifetime, but then I didn’t expect cloning to happen either.
It would certainly make the GEICO commercials more realistic.
Scientifically speaking, the most immediate experiment of interest would be to see if a chimpanzee could be genetically engineered to have an analogue of the human genes for speech. The ethical issues would be less, since it would not be raising the intelligence of the animal per se; it would just be giving it a different mode of expression in addition to sign language.
“Scientifically speaking, the most immediate experiment of interest would be to see if a chimpanzee could be genetically engineered to have an analogue of the human genes for speech.”
No intelligence for Apes. If Charleton Heston taught us anything…..
Seems to me that at worst, you’d be creating a human suffering from effects similar to mild Down’s syndrome and muteness, but with a life span and fertility comparable to a normal human (and strong enough to do good manual labor). That’s a lot of responsibility, but not excessively so for parents (especially those supported by an organization). I recommend doing it.
First, you’d get a lot of insight into what Homo Neanderthalensis was (this is a possible gaze into our past). Second, you’d create a new form of life, but in a way that is likely to minimize problems. An intelligence that is very close to us, physically and mentally is far less likely to experience compatibility problems than a completely alien organism or construct. Since we’re going to create intelligences anyway, it is better to start scoping out the minefield, ethical and otherwise, with a relatively safe and compatible intelligence.
It would certainly make the GEICO commercials more realistic.
I’m thinking there would be a market for more intelligent pets and work animals (guard dogs?).
Just don’t give cats hands. You know this wouldn’t end well.
Just don’t give cats hands. You know this wouldn’t end well.
They’re already pretty adept with their paws as is (at least mine are). What would worry me much more is cats with wings.
Reminds me of the twilight zone where the locals welcome the Earth astronauts and build them a home. They find themselves locked in. Pulling back the drapes they find a crowd of locals staring at them, no doubt with a sign that says, ‘please don’t feed the humans.’
It doesn’t sound like they will be able to clone a neaderthal anytime soon, but it would certainly be interesting if they could. The genie is definitely out of the bottle.
Just because we can make a slave race, doesn’t mean we should! Sorry, but creating a race of near-humans for “manual labor” and “knowledge” would open too many worm cans.
Just one–the slave labor would eliminate the job market for the working poor who have few skills. There are enough unemployed people out there already.
Here’s another–why stop with proto-humans? Why not “experiment” on actual human tissues? Results could be wonderful, but far too open to abuse.
All right, fire away…
It seems to me that we should be accentuating the differences between humanity (and thus, personhood) and the beasts, not blurring the line. And that the “robots” in R.U.R. were actually biological, not mechanical.
In short, me am play Gods!