- Mathias Probst
This conversation is closed.
Provocatively: Who should be allowed to survive?
In a TED-Talk by Juan Enriquez 3 main technological trends are presented that might in the future enable us to improve our perception and other abilities significantly. He is even saying that people with access to such technology would be "Homo Evolutis" and thus a different kind of man. They would be more powerful than "homo sapiens" because of their new abilities.
To avoid such a separation of mankind the access to the technology must be fair and regulated. So: How do we decide who gets access to it? Are socio-economic factors good selection criteria for the new kind of evolution?
As we might in the future have the opportunity to decide ourselves who evolves and who does not, let us set the "selection criteria" consciously and try to base them on more sophisticated indicators than economic or social power.
I think "survival of the moral and intelligent" would be an ideal principle. But I cannot imagine a practicable system of how to objectively find people with those traits and give them access to the technologies yet.
Just to make it clear: "Survival" is meant metaphorically and used as a synonym for getting access to the technologies that Juan Enriquez presents in his talk. There is no literal meaning or any elitistic aspect to it.
Thus the question reformulated is:
Who do you think should get access to the technologies that Juan Enriquez presents and how can this distribution be realised practically, so that it is fair and humanity is not separated into "evolutis" and "sapiens"?