3 ms·

Human reproduction is at or over the limits of what is possible: our heads really don't fit through our pelvii anymore. The trajectory of our species and our ge

by brnt 3y ago

Human reproduction is at or over the limits of what is possible: our heads really don't fit through our pelvii anymore. The trajectory of our species and our genus has been going in the direction of brain enlargement, so it would seem only natural we use that brain to enable evolution of the brain by changing our strenuous births. Remember, there's a ton of science and experience involved in keeping mothers alive already. It is only natural to make the next step. Designing kids and/or producing (for capitalistic purposes) them seems orthogonal to artificial wombs to me: that requires other things besides merely a couple who ask a hospital to fertilize their egg with their sperm and place it in a device.

pfannkuchen 3y ago
> It is only natural to make the next step. One concern is that standardized use of this would seriously risk making humans go extinct in the future. If we completely remove the selection constraint that humans are able to reproduce, over time functionality bugs will creep into that area. If, at any point in the future, society collapses to the point where we are no longer able to build these machines, we may no longer be able to reproduce and will simply die off. Maintaining this constraint on humans seems prudent. If and when we can manipulate genetics well enough to fix the issue in the actual human organism in a way that is not fragile, then that would be fine.
remarkEon 3y ago
>...our heads really don't fit through our pelvii anymore. The trajectory of our species and our genus has been going in the direction of brain enlargement ... I'm interested in reading more about this trend. But whatever the data, it does not sound "natural" to take that phenomenon and apply a mechanical solution to the problem. Taken to its logical conclusion, human reproduction becomes dependent on the availability of these mechanical interventions. That sounds like a really bad idea, at least to me. >Designing kids and/or producing (for capitalistic purposes) them seems orthogonal to artificial wombs to me: that requires other things besides merely a couple who ask a hospital to fertilize their egg with their sperm and place it in a device. It may sound that way, but needing a woman to gestate the new human is a barrier to this activity. Celebrities and the uber-wealthy, in some cases, already essentially rent the reproductive systems of ostensibly willing women for this purpose. Having an artificial means do to this would remove that barrier and significantly expand the market, so one proceeds from the other.
peteradio 3y ago
I don't buy this one little bit. My kids all are in the upper percentiles of head size and my wife birthed naturally even with her "narrow hips".
- Auracle 3y ago
  And yet if you look at the birth of any other animal, their birth is way, way easier. My wife has wide hips but our daughter couldn’t make her way through and needed a c-section. Maybe she could have made it after another 18 hours of labor, or maybe not.

by brnt 3y ago

pfannkuchen 3y ago

> It is only natural to make the next step. One concern is that standardized use of this would seriously risk making humans go extinct in the future. If we completely remove the selection constraint that humans are able to reproduce, over time functionality bugs will creep into that area. If, at any point in the future, society collapses to the point where we are no longer able to build these machines, we may no longer be able to reproduce and will simply die off. Maintaining this constraint on humans seems prudent. If and when we can manipulate genetics well enough to fix the issue in the actual human organism in a way that is not fragile, then that would be fine.

remarkEon 3y ago

>...our heads really don't fit through our pelvii anymore. The trajectory of our species and our genus has been going in the direction of brain enlargement ... I'm interested in reading more about this trend. But whatever the data, it does not sound "natural" to take that phenomenon and apply a mechanical solution to the problem. Taken to its logical conclusion, human reproduction becomes dependent on the availability of these mechanical interventions. That sounds like a really bad idea, at least to me. >Designing kids and/or producing (for capitalistic purposes) them seems orthogonal to artificial wombs to me: that requires other things besides merely a couple who ask a hospital to fertilize their egg with their sperm and place it in a device. It may sound that way, but needing a woman to gestate the new human is a barrier to this activity. Celebrities and the uber-wealthy, in some cases, already essentially rent the reproductive systems of ostensibly willing women for this purpose. Having an artificial means do to this would remove that barrier and significantly expand the market, so one proceeds from the other.

peteradio 3y ago

I don't buy this one little bit. My kids all are in the upper percentiles of head size and my wife birthed naturally even with her "narrow hips".

Auracle 3y ago
And yet if you look at the birth of any other animal, their birth is way, way easier. My wife has wide hips but our daughter couldn’t make her way through and needed a c-section. Maybe she could have made it after another 18 hours of labor, or maybe not.