Jujitsui Generis

More Human Than Human

Arnold Kling's article on the coming age of neurological enhancement is worth reading if only because for all his eloquence in describing the likely possibilities, he is unable to articulate a coherent argument against such targeted enhancements:

I cannot articulate what makes me feel this way. Intellectually, I know that we are bound to see the day -- perhaps we are already there -- where a laboratory-developed stimulant is safer and more effective than caffeine. In that case, my prudishness will be hard to justify.

Kling's honest admission is refreshing.  Even for those of us uncomfortable with the idea of such radical re-definition of the human, there is a vague sense of dissatisfaction with the host of arguments against such tinkering.  Strip away the rhetorical devices and they all seem to boil down to unarticulated intuitions.  Similarly we are filled with a sense of dread.  We are all too aware that intuitions are powerless to stop the incremental spread of the various enhancements that will change 'the human' forever.

The Last Taboo

As the Lawrence Summer's brouhaha earlier this year demonstrated, the idea that group differences can sometimes make a difference is still met - outside small scientific circles - with outright hostility. Ideas can be powerful, and the fear that such discussions may be used to justify inequitable policy arrangements is understandable; but the refusal of the cloistered academy to even discuss the possibility of group differences has a stultifying effect on debate, and may, in the long run, render such vital discussions taboo. As Charles Murray argues in The Inequality Taboo (his first discussion of the subject since The Bell Curve), the idea that biological and genetic differences may play a role in a whole host of group differences need not alter our fundamental intuitions about political and social institutions. After all, the outcome of such a frank and open discussion may be cast either way - it could be used to justify (or critique) policy on either side of the political spectrum. In fact, it may be far more dangerous to refuse to engage the debate and to allow ill-conceived conceptions to guide social policy. Read the whole thing.

Face/Off

The slightly unsettling idea of face transplants for those severely disfigured may be closer than you think (though, if successful, I doubt they are reserved solely for the disfigured for long).

Salvation In A Grain of Rice

Opponents of genetically modified foods and bioengineering are often - in the abstract - motivated by a concern over the loss of 'authenticity'.  Authenticity, in this context, generally contrasts with the artifical and denotes proximity to the 'natural'.  It is conceived as a close relationship between the human and the natural cycles and processes of the world - the idea being that attempts to modify or unravel the activities, processes, and events of the natural world are the ultimate vanity, a condition which disrupts one's natural proper relation of deep humility to the world.  But the entire notion of authenticity is hopelessly incoherent and has a slightly theological air about it.  The quest for authenticity is primarily an aesthetic affair, and seldom do such quests find relevance in the world of policy.  Those hoping for something more foundational on which to attach their grand visions often look to bolster their spiritual intuitions with the rigorous methodologies of science.  But such aesthetic claims rarely find support in careful analysis and attempts at fear-mongering usually birth more examples of junk science (as is the case here).

Thankfully, it's exactly advances like this that belie the claims of the Malthusian prophets of doom and which offer hope to those convinced that our collective hand basket is careening ever faster towards hell.  Most importantly, however, is the salvation such advances offer to those most adversely affected by the 'authenticity' of the natural world, by the natural phenomena of hurricanes, droughts, typhoons, pestilence, etc...  It will be these breakthroughs that produce heartier varieties, higher yields, and increasing nutritional content and will hopefully someday prevent tragedies like this.

Return of the Dead

Scientists are reporting that they have successfully resurrected dogs from the dead.  By draining their blood and filling their veins with a ice-cold saline solution, scientists have been able to leave the dogs clinically dead for as long as three hours before resuscitating the animals by replacing the blood and applying a small electric shock.

Though a far cry from suspended animation, scientists are hoping that the process will one day be used on the battlefield to save wounded soldiers or as a method to treat stabbing and shooting victims.

More Revelations from Genetics

Of course, genetics researchers and others are happy to claim this about people from other races/ethnicities...  but when it comes to intelligence, proposals like those found in Charles Murray's Bell Curve get you stoned by the academic elite.

'The attacks ... often read like an unintentional confirmation of our view of the "cognitive elite" as a new caste, complete with high priests, dogmas, heresies, and apostates. They have revealed the extent to which the social science that deals in public policy has in the latter part of the 20th century become self-censored and riddled with taboos - in a word, corrupt.' (Charles Murray)

If you are a geneticist and you think genes in populations have anything to do with intelligence, I dare you to speak up.