TED Conversations

Dejay Davison

This conversation is closed.

Biotechnology + Plutocracy = 2084?

Synthetic Biology, Nano-biotechnology, 'The Singularity'..

These are just a few of the concepts that will make the human species immune to disease and ageing, which is interesting, right?
But what interests me isn't the inevitable development of these technologies alone but how exactly they will fit and function within the socioeconomic context.

If scientists allow these technologies to be corporatised am I wrong to say there is an intuitive likelihood that it may further the gap between those with power and those without out it? If not make the gap truly impassable once and for all?

Is it hyperbolic for me to assume someone who is selfish and materialistic enough to accumulate billions of dollars would chose immortality and or intellectual enhancement to truly facilitate his position in power indefinitely?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jun 30 2013: response to Paragraph 1: being that i am a fifteen year old teenager I find these kinds of things are more philosophical than physical eventually science will do something like this the question is should we let it do this

    response to Paragraph 2: i feel that they would have been corpratized in the beginning being that as of now the american economy is...less than great the only way to fund something as major as what you speak of is to get it from private sponcers and that would not only widen the gap but also most likely make it clearer about how large the gap is

    response to Paragraph 3: it isn't history shows that power can definitely corrupt and absolute power would be intoxicating enough for almost anyone to wish to take it

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.