James Watson--Genetic Libertarian
Ronald Bailey | June 19, 2003, 11:46am
The current issue of Discover has a fascinating interview with biologist James Watson, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA. For example:
Discover: You are Jim Watson. You're put in charge of how we as a society are going to react to issues raised by genetics—stem cells, bioengineering, and the like. What would you do?
Watson: Well, my sensibility is very libertarian. Just let all genetic decisions be made by individual women. That is, never ask what's good for the country; ask what's good for the family. I don't know what's good for the country, but you can often say what's good or bad for the family. That is, mental disease is no good for any family. And so if there's a way of trying to fight that, I'd let a woman have the choice to do it or not do it. Not give in and have the state tell you to have a certain sort of child. I would be very frightened by the state telling you one way or the other.
Seems exactly right to me.
Raymund | June 19, 2003, 2:39am | #
Sir Real,
"Comparing the cost of regulating gene-mod versus allowing the most rigidly solid class system since caste's [sic] to develop?"
Your fear appears based on two faulty assumptions.
First, you assume human gene-mod will only be available to the upper middle class and above. If cosmetic surgery is any guide, that's incorrect. I don't have the ref handy, but IIRC a majority of plastic surgery patients make less than $50K/yr. (In the Economist a few weeks ago). Or, if private schools are any guide, that's also incorrect. No refs, but I'd guess there are millions of American families making less than $50K/yr who send their kids to private schools to give their kids the best available education. Were I a lower middle class parent, I'd take the biggest loan I could to make sure my kids were gene-mod'd for excellent health, extreme intelligence, and other desirable traits.
Second, you assume superior genes would somehow automatically confer both higher social status and greater success. Prenatal environment, early childhood, and blind luck all have an impact on whom someone becomes. And even if all those dice come up 6s, I've known intelligent stoners, intelligent slackers, and intelligent people with such arrogance and poor social skills that they get fired from job after job.
"The social costs you dismiss are the little things like "All men are created equal".
Jefferson et al. only meant equality before the law. Equal freedom to take actions not directly harmful to others. The Founders did NOT seek equality of results, or even necessarily equality of starting positions. They envisioned a society in which nothing would stop a person, genetically modified or not, from applying to an elite university, starting a business, or pursuing happiness in any other way.
