Logic & First Principles, 16: The problem of playing God (when we don’t — cannot — know how)

In discussing the attempted brain hacking of monkeys, I made a comment about refraining from playing God. This sparked a sharp reaction, then led to an onward exchange. This puts on the table the captioned issue . . . which it seems to me is properly part of our ongoing logic and first principles reflections. Here, the other big piece of axiology (the study of the valuable) ethics, with side-orders of limitations in epistemology. So, kindly allow me to headline:

KF, 10: >>It is interesting what sparked the sharpness of exchange above:

KF: Playing God without his knowledge base, wisdom and benevolence is asking for trouble.

A78 is right:

all I’m saying is proceed with caution we shouldn’t play God because we don’t know how.

Some humility, some prudence, some caution — thus, a least regrets decision principle — is therefore well advised.

A song on Poker as a metaphor for life, once put this . . . I cite as heard on scratchy AM radio decades ago:

know when to hold

know when to fold

know when to walk away

know when to run

you never count your money

sitting at the table

there’ll be time enough

for counting

when the dealing’s

done

[See: https://www.lyricsfreak.com/k/kenny+rogers/the+gambler_20077886.html ]

I add a vid:

Let us again cite his cautions:

A78: I find this comment to be in poor taste “Should we
tell the people that you’re going to die because we shouldn’t play God”
It really doesn’t justify or prove the point of using or doing this type
of research.

It’s more of a manipulative comment trying to force somebody into a
moral dilemma (obviously most people are not going to deny someone life
saving medication) but it certainly doesn’t prove any point. As an
opposite and equal extreme, one can same the same for the opposite
prescriptive. IE “We shouldn’t play God with other living creatures
genomes because we could accidental create a fatal mutation in the
Species which caused its extinction”

Simple slip ups in this field can cause the deaths of millions of
people if not billions with a virus that was genetically engineered or
something that came naturally that sprouted off of our genetic
tampering.

The other scenario could happen after 100 years of genetic
manipulations of the human species, a new virus or other new microbes
now sharing the new genes that we created, come into existence some of
which we might not be able to fight off. The other possibility is
permanent genetic defects that show up way later in a generation because
of our meddling.

In a way, when we mess with the genome, It is similar to introducing a
new species to an ecosystem that is not ready to support it. We do not
know the impact or the effects that could happen down the line but they
can be devastating, and often with proceeded these was good intentions,
Hence “the road to hell is paved in good intentions”

Wisdom requires due humility to recognise the potential for unintended havoc.

We may turn our further thoughts on a premise, that BB intends to
persuade us towards the truth and the right as he perceives it. That is,
he implies a thesis I have often highlighted here at UD in recent
times: our thought-volitional inner life is morally governed. So
governed, by KNOWN — repeat, KNOWN (and undeniable) — duties to truth,
right reason, prudence, fairness and justice, etc. This, on pain of
patent absurdity on the attempted denial (we do not operate on the
global premise of who is the most effective manipulative liar). Where,
such is attested by the witness-voice of conscience. Which cannot be its
grounds, its authentic roots.

So, what is?

We here find ourselves facing the IS-OUGHT gap, and post Hume there
is only one place it can be bridged on pain of ungrounded ought: the
root of reality. We need an inherently good, sound, sufficient root for
reality in order for our whole inner life to make sense, an inner life
we cannot set aside as inconvenient. Where, it is easy to see that for
such a root, there is but one serious candidate. (As this is a
philosophical exercise [and not an undue imposition], if you dispute
this, simply provide and justify a serious alternative: _________ ,
addressing comparative difficulties: _________ )

The candidate is: the inherently good and utterly wise creator
God, a necessary and maximally great being, worthy of our loyalty and of
the responsible, reasonable service of doing the good that accords with
our manifest nature.

And, it will be readily apparent that when one deals with powerful,
potentially destructive ill-understood domains fraught with moral
hazards, a due recognition that we are not omnipotent, we are not
omniscient, we are not omnibenevolent, would be appropriate. As Cicero
summed up, conscience is a law, prudence is a law.

So, for one, instead of playing heedlessly with gene engineering
fire, we should learn from the history of damaging industrial
development, spewing all sorts of chemicals into the environment (and
into our foods), importing invasive species and the challenges of
nuclear technology and should proceed with humility, prudence,
soundness. How many times have we been promised sci-tech, technocratic
utopias that failed? Failed, with awful consequences and costs?

It is not for nothing that Hippocrates and others taught us to ponder
the duties of the learned professional in society (and environment).

First, do no harm.

Second,

art is long,
life is short,
opportunity fleeting,

[experience treacherous,]
judgement difficult.

[Thanks SM]

The professional must therefore act with due humility and prudence,
understanding the doctrine of unintended consequences in a deeply
interconnected world. Where, a properly cultivated conscience is a part
of the picture. Where, part of that education is and should be, the
lessons of our civilisation’s tradition of ethical theism. For, we need
to recognise that we are not God.

Something, that rage at our creator, the source of reality, wisdom and sound moral government, is liable to forget.

Anger, is a blinding emotion.>>

Food for thought. END

Copyright © 2019 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.
Plugin by Taragana