Pinker on the Brain

Cognitive scientist and Blank Slate suthor Steven Pinker had a sharp piece on overwrought fears about genetic enhancement in yesterday's Boston Globe Ideas section. "My point," he writes,

is not that genetic enhancement is impossible, just that it is far from inevitable. And that has implications. Some bioethicists have called for impeding or criminalizing certain kinds of research in genetics and reproductive medicine, despite their promise of improvement in health and happiness. That is because the research, they say, will inevitably lead to designer babies. If genetic enhancement really were just around the corner, these proposals would have to be taken seriously. But if the prospect is very much in doubt, we can deal with the ethical conundrums if and when they arise. Rather than decrying our posthuman future, thinkers should acknowledge the frailty of technological predictions. They should base policy recommendations on likelihoods rather than fantasies.

Read Reason's own interview with Pinker here.

Comments

[Matthew Cromer]

I read his Reason interview for the first time, and thought his first two critiques were spot on. However, his answer to the "Ghost in the Machine" critique was unconvincing and weak, relying on the "correlation equals causation" fallacy.

[Rick Barton]

Pinker raises some interesting points, but as a defence to idiotic neo-luddite fear-mongering by the likes of Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics (I'm sorry, but is this what we need a Republican in the White House for? Bumper sticker seen in Denver says it well:... "God, I miss Reagan and Elway") Pinker needs to do better than conjecturing that a lot of genetic manipulation probably won't be feasable
anyway. He's right, but the best arguments for not having the government prohibit it is that poeple want it, they want what's best for their kids and much of it will infact work. When it does, mass demand will ensue generating production and prices that the masses can afford. Remember when vitamin supplementation for kids was practiced only by an informed "elite" few? But, as its efficacy was established demand soared, choices increased and prices dropped. If government gets out of the way a similar path for genetic manipulation will obtain. Government also can choose another course and stifle progress in health and well being.

[T.I.Cheek]

But it's right there, in the U.S. Constitution. Article XXIV, Section 73, paragraph 9. To wit: "Government shall regulate, forbid, and wholly outlaw any and all practices relating to biological and genetic alteration. This proscription shall be the sole purview of the Federal Government, to the exclusion of the several states, and shall be binding in perpetuity."