Designer Babies

[Lemmingwise]

Point taken.
The real question is "what difference does it make?" Does the question even make sense?
This is where we diverge from armchair science to armchair philosophy: Is there some sort of "you-ness" that "you" possess? Does the real "you" die at some point in this genetic modification process only to be replaced by an imposter in a body that's not technically even yours now? We could go even further with this line of sophistry by arguing about whether 6 year old "you" is the "you" that you are today regardless of any form of genetic modification. Anything "you" experienced back then is not something you're experiencing now, nor is what "you" will be experiencing 5 minutes from now. I could go as far as to say that "you" only exist for the briefest moment that you can possibly experience, only to be replaced by a "you" that has had said experience.

All the pseudo-babble aside, the bottom line is that none of this shit matters. You (or "you" as it may be) are probably better off not worrying about it.

I don't think it's sophistry or pseudo babble to think or talk about this stuff, even if it's hard and non-intuitive.

We use similar metaphors when people go against their values or stated values. "he isn't himself" or "he isn't the man he used to be". Sure if you take things super precise, that's always true for every man. But I think the meaning we're trying to convey is the connection between identity and the entity.

As for the overall question. I don't think crispring your baby makes you a cuck, but it depends on how far you go with it. We have a natural affinity towards people that are genetically similar, the way adopted twins discover when they meet each other. Genes play a very large part in who we are. Besides raising offspring that isn't fully yours, are you severing your capacity to connect with each other?

 

[Watermelanin]

We have a natural affinity towards people that are genetically similar, the way adopted twins discover when they meet each other. Genes play a very large part in who we are. Besides raising offspring that isn't fully yours, are you severing your capacity to connect with each other?

Now THAT is a much more interesting question with some practical implications. And obviously not one we really have the capacity to know the answer to until we start doing it. We can get some hints though. It seems pretty intuitive to me that you'd need to do some drastic changes to actually sever that connection at a biological level. Half of your child's DNA does belong to the other parent after all. Altering a handful of key genes to promote good health is unlikely to have much of an impact in this regard. Aesthetic changes probably will have a much greater effect, though, as the differences between the parents and child will be apparent.
Biology isn't the only issue here, though. The parents will always know that they are raising a genetically modified child. There's certainly going to be some psychological barriers involved with that, at least until the practice becomes sufficiently commonplace.

This leads to another branch of thought here: The early days of designer babies are going to be hectic to say the least. They're gonna need to do clinical trials. The kids are gonna need to be kept anonymous to avoid stigma. Should the kids even be allowed to know they're genetically modified or should the parents be put under gag orders? Off-target gene insertions happen too, so there's gonna be a lot of "oops, we developed a never before seen genetic disorder in one of these children" going on. What a clusterfuck that's all gonna be.

 

[Large]

If you had designer babies you could have babies with minorities and then edit them to be White.

It might also be possible to use the insect allies program virus making tech to make a mosquito-spread virus that makes everyone white, that'd go faster.

 

[Overly Serious]

I recently started watching Star Trek which I'd never really been into. It's a bit hokey here and there but there's some interesting ideas in there and one is that the last big wars Earth had were the "Eugenics Wars" where humanity began fracturing between genetically improved humans and the baseline. It's one of those genies in the bottle like nuclear weaponds because once one faction starts doing it game theory demands everyone else do it, too. Not having genetically improved humans is an unstable situation (in a mathematical sense). It is possible now and the reach of those possibilities expands every day. Sooner or later someone does it in a more meaningful way and then the cascade starts and there's either a wild and overwhelming attempt to put the genie back in its place or the situation collapses into a new equilibrium where genetically improved humans are the norm.

Many will be against it of course. But if you could choose your partner to be some physically perfected woman or man, smart, stays strong and youthful into their fifties, tall, no genetic weaknesses... wouldn't you desire that person? All else being equal?

Eugenics Wars... if humanity saw the rich and powerful - and it's they who would first have access to this - not merely having more but creating a better, superior version of themselves - wouldn't the masses resent that? Sooner or later, would we get ?

 

[Cedric_Eff]

I'll only do it to fix major genetic defects.