I'll be a monkey's uncle: a moral challenge to human genetic enhancement research

Abstract

The potential for genetic engineering of enhancements to complex human traits has been the subject of vigorous debate for a number of years. Most of the discussion has centered on the possible moral consequences of pursuing enhancements, especially those that might affect complex behaviours and components of personality. Little has been written on the actual process of implementing this technology. This paper presents a 'thought experiment' about the likely form of final preclinical testing for a technology to enhance intelligence as a prototypical multiplex trait. The significance and the potential dangers of implementing enhancements in humans, especially to highly valued traits such as intelligence, would mandate a thorough programme of testing in animals, including non-human primates such as chimpanzees. The implications this would have for researchers, society and, most importantly, the animals themselves are discussed, and the paper concludes with a suggestion for a morally justifiable approach to resolve the tragic question of what to do with research animals who have a cognitive capacity that is close to that of humans.

Ethical Challenges of Germline Genetic Enhancement

“…The lack of restrictions makes it possible to foresee the social drift that these technologies may cause (Mehlman, 2005; Ishii, 2017b) although some authors consider this caution for inequality disproportionate (Fenton, 2010) and limit their scope to assess of damage that might be predicted after implementation of enhancement interventions (Persson, 2012). Even so, the fear of a social disadvantage in unenhanced children is recurrent and considered immoral and unjustified due to its potential for discrimination (Jensen, 2011), the possible unknown consequences in complex thinking and reasoning (Rosoff, 2011) and other long term secondary effects (Glick, 2011). In this sense, the alarm over the application of techniques that we do not understand completely or do not know how to control (GüellPelayo, 2014), ranges from conditioning and alteration of the child’s future (Bredenoord et al, 2014) to a series of enhancements that eventually may lead to social fragmentation and disintegration (Sparrow, 2015).…”

‘My child will never initiate Ultimate Harm’: an argument against moral enhancement

“…One issue here has to do with whether the use of non-human animals in genetic moral enhancement research is itself ethical. Rosoff advances an interesting argument that needs to be taken seriously, suggesting that it is wrong to merely assume that genetic enhancement research on animals is morally innocuous 14. Indeed, given the nature of this research as having genetic and mental components, we need to ask what repercussions morally enhanced nonhuman animals may reap in the wake of being so enhanced, and the extent to which any status or interests they may possess mitigates away from such research initiatives.…”