• fartographer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m not sure that I agree with the bioengineering part, but maybe I don’t understand what you mean. I’d love it if you’d elaborate.

    • themaninblack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Sorry for the late reply.

      It seems to me that the above items are part of our nature. We haven’t yet figured out a sociological or technical solution to the problem of war, for example, despite huge scientific progress in other domains.

      So it seems to me that it is in our nature. We are wired for in-group bias. So I think we may have to change our biology before we lose these tragic aspects of humanity, or else they will keep resurfacing.

      It’s kind of far out though. And we definitely don’t have the tools yet. And there are huge issues, both ethical and practical, with implementation of something like this. Brave New World stuff.

      But if, in the future, we could somehow surgically target some secondary messenger protein or something which would reduce the likelihood of conflict without side effects, it would be nice to prevent Armageddon-level war.

      Many 20th century philosophers cited nuclear weapons as our greatest existential threat.