Are Genetically “Perfect Babies” a Threat to Humanity?
The fact that the Chinese are openly pursuing eugenic improvement of their race has sparked more anti-eugenic hysteria from the controlled media — and the controlled masses.
by David Sims
FIRST, CALLING genetically improved babies “perfect” is hyperbole. What we are talking about isn’t really perfection; it’s more like a very substantial improvement in human quality. I’ll continue to use the hyperbolic term for the moment, since others are using it in this debate.
Perfect babies are babies without the flaws that have plagued humankind for hundreds of thousands of years. Perfect babies are humans minus cancer, minus diabetes, minus myopia, minus birth defects of all kinds. Perfect babies are humans with higher intelligence, who live long and amazingly productive lives and who are healthy unto their last day. Perfect babies grow into adults who are above average in beauty and in moral conduct.
What the hell is wrong with perfect people? Only that the non-perfect are strongly disadvantaged when competing with them. But that’s always been the case among humans, among whom some have been better than others since Homo habilis, if not earlier.
The acceleration of evolution among part of humanity will impose a cost on the part of humanity that isn’t eugenically enhanced. But what of it? The “perfect” people are, each of them, just as human as any non-perfect human is. You don’t lose a speck of “humanness” simply because you replace a biologically flawed human with a human that isn’t so biologically flawed.
You only lose the flaws.
Also, perfection (or a state approximating it) isn’t “boring,” as some have alleged. Perfection doesn’t mean that everybody is a close copy of everybody else. It only means that everyone is smart, agile, strong, resistant to disease, etc. It doesn’t mean that everyone has the same ideas, as if their world were some sort of echo chamber.
The opposite is closer to the truth: What produces uniformity of belief is general stupidity plus mass propaganda, not exceedingly high intelligence. And if a greater convergence upon fewer alternative belief systems did happen to occur in a eugenic future, then the most likely reason is that the generally higher intelligence of the people had allowed us to discover a greater number of falsehoods — and to reject them in favor of truth.
Is there something wrong with everyone recognizing truth? No.
There would continue to be disagreements, differences of opinion, varying philosophies. But the disagreements and the discussions pertaining to them would be, in general, on a much higher level, a circumstance made possible by their higher intelligence. It wouldn’t be boring.
The assertion that making mankind as biologically flawless as possible would be boring is something that the genus Australopithecus might have said in regard to genus Homo, or something that the species Homo erectus might have said in regard to species Homo sapiens. Now we are on the cusp of creating the species Homo divinus, and a member of the species Homo sapiens thinks that there is something wrong with it.
Making your low-ball attributes “work for you” might make a game like Dungeons and Dragons more interesting. But life is not a game. A main character in a fantasy story might be more interesting to readers if he has a flaw that he must deal with and overcome. But life is not a fantasy story. That’s a metaphor that superficially sounds good, but, really, it isn’t.
Anyway, no race can afford to forgo the benefits, the advantages, of eugenic improvement when there is any other race that is gaining those advantages for themselves. If we do not wish to be out-competed, dominated, replaced, and eventually driven to extinction, then we must also gain those benefits and advantages. The genie of human eugenics is out of the bottle. We must have our share of its power, or we will forfeit our existence.
* * *