Chit chat blah blah corner!! - Page 38

Originally posted by: _Angie_

How would you define good genes? What if the baby grows up to look down on his parents with not so "good genes" ?

If the kid is looking down on his parents, then obviously the kid doesn't have good genes.

Good genes are those that produce the "right" proteins that make the cell behave the "right" way at the microscopic level, which in turn make the human behave the "right" way at the macroscopic level.

The "right" way is of course undefined as of now. I am sure the process to arrive at a rule book that defines the "right'" way will be democratic across the world if we do get to the point of altering the human genome.

well by good genes I just meant.. nice sharp features and all rounder (sports, arts,science, maths, people management...and everything else) .. very very intelligent... and tall

Originally posted by: enigmatic_zephy

well by good genes I just meant.. nice sharp features and all rounder (sports, arts,science, maths, people management...and everything else) .. very very intelligent... and tall

😆

Nature is a moot point... everyone has to compromise with everyone else..

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Good genes are those that produce the "right" proteins that make the cell behave the "right" way at the microscopic level, which in turn make the human behave the "right" way at the macroscopic level.

The "right" way is of course undefined as of now. I am sure the process to arrive at a rule book that defines the "right'" way will be democratic across the world if we do get to the point of altering the human genome.

Originally posted by: charminggenie

Good looks in a country like desh, infact many others would mean fair skin. Other attributes might create a divide between synthetic babies and the natural born ones who might have certain flaws.

Programming them to be inclining towards a particular subject would mean controlling their life , encroachment on their right to live..we protest too much when our families/parents/society decide for us..won't the same be true for them?

Originally posted by: enigmatic_zephy

well by good genes I just meant.. nice sharp features and all rounder (sports, arts,science, maths, people management...and everything else) .. very very intelligent... and tall

😆

Nature is a moot point... everyone has to compromise with everyone else..

All this eugenics discussion reminds me of Gattaca.

Originally posted by: _Angie_

In other words what you suggest is that those who confirm to a (democratic) predefined set of rules should be considered right and good. Rest would be bad/wrong.

That would infringe on one's right to freedom of choice.

Of course there could be a democratic decision on whether freedom of choice itself is right or wrong.

We would have customised robot-humans!

We could take a vote on that right now : ))

I would imagine the rule book would adhere to normative ethics.

Those with altered genes will have the "right" conduct. Those without, may or may not have the "right" conduct.

Good genes are those that look good in good jeans.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Good genes are those that look good in good jeans.

genes wear nothing.