Do we have the moral right to create Artifical Life?

Post Reply New Topic

There was a time, well, my first 3 years as an undergrad, when I was interested in pursuing the molecular life sciences(biochemistry, physiology, and biophysics to be exact). And one of my goals as an aspiring molecular biologist would be to use recombinant DNA technology to create a 'synthetic organism'.

In reality, this would not involve creating life from scratch but would involved producing a transgenic organism so radically different from the base organism that it would constitute an entirely new species. The first project would be to genetically modify a fungus species to make it more like an animal with mycelium containing protein motors and much higher metabolic rate that would feed on detritus but creating a new animal whose intelligence is even greater than humanly possible.

Now the human brain has ~100 billion neurons. These neurons and the resulting organ structure & function are determined by a set of genes. The development on the brain is a complex sequence of genes been turned on and off while acting in concert. So what I propose is clone the genes responsible for brain development, modify them, and insert them into the base organism to develop a brain with at least 1 trillion neurons and prehensile digits enabling them to grasp objects and develop fine motor skills like humans and several other mammals do. And lastly would be enhancing their reproductive biology to allow them to live as long as humans but unlike women the females can reproduce throughout their adult life(giving them an evolutionary advantage).


So discuss~ Is this ethical ? Also, is it true that access to lab equipment and biochemicals required for genetic engineering is strictly regulated by the gubbermint so that no one can create their own gene laboratory without some kind of authorization. I am interested in cost required for something like this compared to the costs of building a sentient robot with quantum processors.

^^^^^^^^^Some reptile females can reproduce without a male.Komodo Dragons can.
Many new intelligence tests involving reptiles have proven a greater adaptability than mammals,Forget mammal D.N.A.,go reptile.
With global warming we can't lose,good basking weather.

This creature most likely would be neither mammal nor reptile. The trouble with reptiles is that their metabolism isn't high enough to support a large, complex brain like that.

Yes why not clone humans, then harvest their organs to expend life even father.

why make an animal? not a fungi, protist, bacteria, or plant?

Because the latter 3 aren't capable of sentience nor are they nearly as capable of influencing nature the way humans, who are ANIMALS, can. The point is to create a new animal more intelligent and complex than humans which will rule over humans eventually.

Moral rights are decided by society.

So, yeah, if we decide so.

society consists of individuals like you or me.

ruveyn

Clone organs can be harvested but how do you harvest a heart without killing the clone?

Good point. You'd have to figure out how to grow the organ in vitro and the time it would take for the clone to grow enough in size to match the recipients heart size would be too long.





We are individuals but a society is a collection of individuals who clearly DO have many things in common! Or at least the vast majority of them do otherwise society would disintegrate. When people live in such large groups there have to be rules which govern how people behave towards each other in order for them to get along with one another. A highly centralized society has either one person or perhaps a council of high clerics who codify morals that everybody else has to follow. You could follow your own morals but there will be negative social repercussions and perhaps legal consequences if your morals conflict with societies morals.

That's basically what I meant.

Yes, but only if said life is given the same rights and morals as the other humans it is around.


What matters not is the ethical implications, but whether or not we can actually trust people to treat them as other humans.

Sounds interesting, but more like a hybrid than a new type of life, although it would be a new type, but if something is a hybrid then technically it isnt entirely new. Although the hybrid itself would be.

Brains hog energy, so ten times the size would have a constant hunger.

Do not worry about our ethics, consider the ethics of your creation, when the main meat supply is us.

Artifical intelligence is measured by ours, and we still fear The Teledyne Corp. Creating a non human super intelligence, it would have nothing in common with us.

10,000 years ago there was another hominid in South Africa with a larger brain. While projected to be intelligent, they died out.

The concept has potential, we know several things that can increase brain size in humans. Unethical to the Max, but perhaps if sold as an Autism cure?

What ever it is humans will kill it, or it humans, so the only way to tell is do it.

What if you could even harvest the Brain?

We are talking about increasing mental processing power right? What if the brain of the clone could be grafted to the brain of the original doubling their brain power?

Sure you'd have to do some creative plastic surgery and they might just wear a top hat all the time.

There is no necessary connection between brain mass and intelligence.

ruveyn