Abstract
Our biotechnologies have entered uncharted territory. The facility for precision editing of the human genome raises the prospect of systematic, ‘post-Darwinian’ control of inheritance. Stem cells can be used to make embryo-like structures that were never fertilized eggs and which might or might not recapitulate normal embryonic development. Neural ‘organoids’ grown in a dish force us to ask what are the minimal substrates of consciousness. It is easy to spin dystopian tales out of such developments, but those offer little guidance for the more urgent issue of how to regulate these technologies or how to discuss their ethical and societal implications. Here I argue for the importance, in those debates, of keeping historical and cultural perspectives visible and explicit: on the one hand to recognize the deep roots of the more lurid fantasies that these developments evoke, and on the other hand to consider how the latest advances challenge the narratives that scientists themselves have employed to frame their research. We should be prepared to be unsettled by what in 1890 zoologist Jacques Loeb called ‘a technology of living substance’—but perhaps not necessarily in ways we can anticipate.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Notes and Records: the Royal Society Journal of the History of Science
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.