About this talk: Medical ethicist Harvey Fineberg shows us three paths forward for the ever-evolving human species: to stop evolving completely, to evolve naturally — or to control the next steps of human evolution, using genetic modification, to make ourselves smarter, faster, better. Neo-evolution is within our grasp. What will we do with it?
As I browsed the front page of TED.com this morning, the nerd inside of me immediately had me drawn to this talk by Harvey Fineberg, the president of the Institute of Medicine. As summarized above, Fineberg discusses three evolutionary pathways the human species can possibly take in the future. Neo-evolution seems to be what Fineberg is biased towards.
Science has always been a field of study that has attracted unwanted ethical issues. The classical friction between religion and science, for example, has been around for centuries (go get ‘em, Galileo). Using and abusing animals for the name of science has also been an issue. So, we can assume the same for the study of genetics. *cough* Eugenics movement in Germany *cough* Hitler *cough cough* The Immigration Restriction Act *cough*
Watch the video and pay special attention to the third evolutionary pathway Fineberg discusses. Does what Fineberg suggest scare you or inspire you? Does this “neo-evolution” theory smell of an unsavory contemporary version of eugenics? Or is the technological modification of our gene pool our best bet for the survival of our species?
Post submitted by: Crystal Maranan