h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Aside: edited entry on ethics is at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A493607

This entry seems more like the ethics of "eugenics" and the genetic engineering of humans than genertic engineering in general - there's a bunch of ethics-related stuff before you even start mucking around with humans: questions like how you deal with vegetarianism when you aren't sure whether something is animal or vegetable.

There are those who say, for example, that genetic engineering on crops is a bad thing because it exposes prople to unknown risks without their consent - and just from a consequentialist point of view, mucking around with viruses and suchlike is a bad idea - there was a recent case in which a hoped-for "long life" genemod-virus for rats wiped them all out overnight: completely by accident the scientists had created something hugely deadly - but they got lucky, so it was no more than a footnote in New Scientist.

Back on the topic of the entry, myself, I'd say that there's more to my personality, humanity, and individualism than a mass of DNA strands, malformed or otherwise. We're all a product of our environment as much as out DNA (much more so, some would say) - even with identical "programs" we'd still be a long way from being droids. Even the clones of "Brave New World" had personalities.

More relevantly, why would you think that the eventual goal of eugenics would be for everyone to be identical? Check out the theory of "Comparative Advantage" - it's advantagous, economically and in general, for people to specialise.

Our brains are limited to a certain size - any bigger and we hit a bunch of problems, from heat dispersion to birth difficulties to power consumption. The ideal human is not one who is perfect at everything, but one who is dang good at what they do, and comparatively pants at what they don't, preferably with really good communication skills - the one thing that is universally required.

The improvement in the textiles industry hasn't led to us all wearing the same "perfect" clothes, has it? Why should brainhacking be any different?

More later...

Considering how much can be said about this topic, it is an awfully short entry. There lacks a whole lot of pro´s and con´s in it. Mind if I make a few adjustments?

Lucinda, Xanatic,

the original researcher Technocanuck seems to have retired quite a while ago so you probably won't get a response from him at all. I wouldn't be surprised if he isn't even aware that his article is now part of the edited guide, as he didn't recommend the entry to peer review himself, another researcher did that.

While subbing this article, I must admit that I overlooked the conversations in PR and therefore didn't include any of the enhancements suggested.

If you like, you could enhance the article yourself by using the 'test' facility and to post it to PR again, mentioning that you updated an existing entry (include URL). When the new collaborate entry gets eventually recommended, it will replace the existing one. I would be happy to assist you or to help out if you have questions on this, just ask.

SchrEck Inc.

Hi Schreck... :) On balance, I think it would be a good temporary fix to retitle this entry to, say, "Ethics of Human Genetic Engineering" or "Ethics of Hunome Modification" {hunome is short for human genome}. There are other entries in the guide about genetic engineering, and it would seem somewhat ambitious for a single entry to try and cover all the bases. Indeed, there's an entry on the ethics of GM food at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A429581 which is currently in Peer Review - which, with some work, may well be suitable for the guide. In the long term, I'd be happy for this entry to get the normal update process when it's turn comes around. While it's missing stuff, it's no worse than many other entries, so I don't think there's any urgency here - provided the title gets changed... No criticism of your subbing work - looks to me like you've done a good job... :) {the original PR thread of this entry is at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F48816?thread=96221}

What "test" facility, and how do we use it? And the original article is available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A395020 along with assorted comments.

[broken link]

for example...

The 'test' facility is a means to see the GuideML of an existing article you haven't written yourself. Take the URL of an entry and replace 'A123456' by 'test123456', then you will see a text box with the coding. You could then cut-and-paste the GuideML into your own entries. It's described somewhere in the Bruce's GuideML clinic, I just don't remember where exactly.

Thanks, Lucinda, for your comments. I haven't decided yet which alterations to make on the article and how to have them incorporated in the edited entry, this is always sort of bureaucratic... Perhaps I'll contact Anna first and ask for advice on this.

Stay tuned, I will inform you here when I know more.

Uh, I just learned that the 'test' facility has been turned off temporarily because it had a bug in it and that it will be turned on again soon.