Equations are not being displayed properly on some articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Our apologies.

Tatrocki, P. (2006). Is there any need to modify the human genotype?. PHILICA.COM Observation number 30.

ISSN 1751-3030  
Log in  
Register  
  1074 Articles and Observations available | Content last updated 28 May, 06:11  
Philica entries accessed 3 028 435 times  


NEWS: The SOAP Project, in collaboration with CERN, are conducting a survey on open-access publishing. Please take a moment to give them your views

Submit an Article or Observation

We aim to suit all browsers, but recommend Firefox particularly:

Is there any need to modify the human genotype?

Pawel Tatrockiconfirmed userThis person has donated to Philica (Department of Physics, Pedagogical Academy, Cracow)

Published in philoso.philica.com

Observation
The more we are able to modify the genotypies of different bodies the much stronger the following question appears: should we modify the genotype of our children only to improve their inteligence, strenght, appearence etc.? In my opinion it is unnecesary. The reason is as follows: the God exists. There are many physical proofs of His existence (e.g. the miracle in Lanziano, where there is the entropy rule stopped). Thus, we should the problem: what we can get from Him in return for our good life and prayers to Him? Shall we only expect the prize of being in the heaven after our life? No. There is strong evidence that many people got from Him that gifts what are they had been praying for. For example Saint Thomas Aquinas got the supernatural grace of sexual purity and apart from that the supernatural mind. So, why apart from being saint not to pray for mathematical, physical or artistic genius? If you start early you will get it yet during your professional life. From the history we know that getting such a gift takes about 20-30 years. But, I think, it is worth waiting for it for such a long time.

References
St. Augustin - Confessiones.

Information about this Observation
Peer-review ratings (from 2 reviews, where a score of 100 represents the ‘average’ level):
Originality = 75.00, importance = 116.67, overall quality = 75.00
This Observation was published on 18th November, 2006 at 13:09:13 and has been viewed 6496 times.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.
The full citation for this Observation is:
Tatrocki, P. (2006). Is there any need to modify the human genotype?. PHILICA.COM Observation number 30.


<< Go back Review this ObservationPrinter-friendlyReport this Observation


1 Peer review [reviewer #2144unconfirmed user] added 24th November, 2006 at 03:39:13

Although this observation is a little short, it is very meaningful. Of importance is the fact that the author, who is trained in physics, is also concerned about philosophy of the human genome.

But then again, physics is natural philosophy, and anyone interested in physics ought to be interested in philosophy too.

My answer to the question “Is there any need to modify the human genotype?” is “No”, if it is merely to make the human race stronger, and more intelligent.

However, if modification of the human genotype leads to cures to diseases like cancer, mental illnesses, and other forms of sickness that have a strong genetic component, my answer will be “Maybe”.

Originality: 4, Importance: 4, Overall quality: 4


2 Author comment added 24th November, 2006 at 18:34:29

Yes, I agree with the previous comment concerning the answer for the question about the possibilty of curing the variety of diseases. This is the permissible way of gentic treatment that is allowed by the Catholic Faith. But, the problem is much deeper that only the possiblity of potential removing of the different illneses. Can we improve our own human nature without applying gentic modifications? Is there any need to do it? There are many people who don’t believe in God, so why, they can think, not to use genetic modifications for our children for them to have advantage over those children whose parents believe in God? This is their own problem, not ours. Thus, the Catholic should explicit show to the non-belivers, that the faith gives much more apart from salvation and, that only from them depends the kind of received gifts. This is an ontological theory but the next years should show the truth of this observations. The problem is what kind of the method allows me to receive the desired gift? The answer is: the knowledge of the spiritual nature of the man, of the natural nature of them and of the nature of the relationship between the God and the man. And the konwledge about the methods of praying that can be very effective when using in proper time of the spiritual development. Thus, having appropriate knowledge, determination and lots of stamina one can start begging for the gift. And a one thing more: there does matter which Christian Faith you are of. So, theology of the spiritual life and neuro-psychology are the key to the problem. This is the implication of the human nature, that is dual -spiritual-natural.


3 Peer review [reviewer #47336unconfirmed user] added 30th September, 2011 at 16:13:09

The author’s absolute statement : *”In my opinion it is unnecesary”* seems unjustified as a general statement on logical and moral grounds, not only in the context considered of children, but also in regard of eliminating the effects of ‘deleterious genes’, and genes that may result in the death of a child shortly after its birth. The absolute statement cited is probably unjustified on religious or theological grounds as well, but that is for the parents, theologicians and the church(es) to decide, and it may take centuries to do so. Morover, the catholic church, for example, has changed its views many times on fundamental issues related to this theme.

Originality: 1, Importance: 6, Overall quality: 1


4 Additional peer comment [reviewer #47336unconfirmed user] added 30th September, 2011 at 16:15:05

The author’s absolute statement : *”In my opinion it is unnecesary”* seems unjustified as a general statement on logical and moral grounds, not only in the context considered of children, but also in regard of eliminating the effects of ‘deleterious genes’, and genes that may result in the death of a child shortly after its birth. The absolute statement cited is probably unjustified on religious or theological grounds as well, but that is for the parents, theologicians and the church(es) to decide, and it may take centuries to do so. Morover, the catholic church, for example, has changed its views many times on fundamental issues related to this theme.




Website copyright © 2006-07 Philica; authors retain the rights to their work under this Creative Commons License and reviews are copyleft under the GNU free documentation license.
Using this site indicates acceptance of our Terms and Conditions.

This page was generated in 0.3138 seconds.