AI is a modern problem, getting rid of negative traits is a potential problem. Getting rid of negative traits incur that something about the person or being is a disorder. That could be schizophrenia or autism, that are more considered like problems, even though these are problems that are at the core of society, not problems with the people themselves. Getting rid of these might seem logical, but they also meddle with what a person is at its core. Now moving on to things that are more accepted by the literature as non deviant genetic ‘traits’ would be homosexuality and transness. What if this defiant and deviant mode of living was to be erased by genetic modification? I’m sure the parents would be proud, but you just got rid of something that is at the core of what that person is. That is against diversity by itself. Genetic modification in the sense of eugenics or getting rid of negative traits is the same as eliminating diversity and difference, which is why Hitler picked at it so much.
I’ll elaborate even more: Arjun Appadurai implies at his “Fear of Small Numbers” that at the core of eliminating difference there is a deep desire for oneness. That those who are different are such small steps away from complete oneness and national identity. That is, I exist in the society which I identify as real, and anything against that is so close to inexistant that I could just wipe them out and be in my happy place. So close to it, but not quite. Something that Appadurai calls the state of “incompleteness”.
It does not seem obvious to me that we should get rid of autism. I don’t know any studies that suggest that people with autism have a lower quality of life. Autism is a form of being different – neurodivergent. There may be disadvantages to being autistic, but there are likely advantages too. That is different from other more severe disorders that are genetic. (Is autism even genetic?)
Similarly, being LGBTQ+ is not a disadvantage in a sane society. In fact, being bisexual is an advantage I would argue. Regardless, it’s not genetic, so why even bring that up?
But there are genetic disorders nearly everyone agrees should be eradicated.
I’m not really sure it matters what you think when history has shown again and again that there are people more than willing to use technology like this for evil, racist, etc. ends.
AI is a modern problem, getting rid of negative traits is a potential problem. Getting rid of negative traits incur that something about the person or being is a disorder. That could be schizophrenia or autism, that are more considered like problems, even though these are problems that are at the core of society, not problems with the people themselves. Getting rid of these might seem logical, but they also meddle with what a person is at its core. Now moving on to things that are more accepted by the literature as non deviant genetic ‘traits’ would be homosexuality and transness. What if this defiant and deviant mode of living was to be erased by genetic modification? I’m sure the parents would be proud, but you just got rid of something that is at the core of what that person is. That is against diversity by itself. Genetic modification in the sense of eugenics or getting rid of negative traits is the same as eliminating diversity and difference, which is why Hitler picked at it so much.
I’ll elaborate even more: Arjun Appadurai implies at his “Fear of Small Numbers” that at the core of eliminating difference there is a deep desire for oneness. That those who are different are such small steps away from complete oneness and national identity. That is, I exist in the society which I identify as real, and anything against that is so close to inexistant that I could just wipe them out and be in my happy place. So close to it, but not quite. Something that Appadurai calls the state of “incompleteness”.
It does not seem obvious to me that we should get rid of autism. I don’t know any studies that suggest that people with autism have a lower quality of life. Autism is a form of being different – neurodivergent. There may be disadvantages to being autistic, but there are likely advantages too. That is different from other more severe disorders that are genetic. (Is autism even genetic?)
Similarly, being LGBTQ+ is not a disadvantage in a sane society. In fact, being bisexual is an advantage I would argue. Regardless, it’s not genetic, so why even bring that up?
But there are genetic disorders nearly everyone agrees should be eradicated.
Stop calling it a choice: Biological factors drive homosexuality
I’m not really sure it matters what you think when history has shown again and again that there are people more than willing to use technology like this for evil, racist, etc. ends.