3 ms·
Maybe, but voluntarism is only part of the moral equation. So-called genetic "designer babies" are widely considered morally problematic but that process is to
by drostie 14y ago
Maybe, but voluntarism is only part of the moral equation.
So-called genetic "designer babies" are widely considered morally problematic but that process is totally voluntary; and in general eugenics provides an echo-chamber for certain discriminatory beliefs. In a very strong way what we're talking about is capitalism, which does the same thing -- unregulated markets adapt to whatever discrimination allows them to have more customers.
So I agree with the comment a couple levels above -- there is a strong batch of ethical concerns here beyond just "there are kids out there who biologically trace you as their father/mother" and it's a bit of a pity that those concerns were not strongly addressed.
- pjscott 14y agoI think what we have here is a case of status quo bias -- new things get subjected to more intense ethical scrutiny because they're new. Selective breeding of humans has been around for as long as there have been humans; it's what people do when they choose a mate. Evolutionarily, this is simply a matter of trying to choose the most advantageous genes to mix with yours, to maximize the expected propagation of your own genes. In practice, it is a eugenics program on a vast scale, and nobody seems to have a problem with it, despite the fact that it "provides an echo-chamber for certain discriminatory beliefs" and can lead to inbreeding if you're reckless. All that sperm banks do is amplify this selection.