In a recent article in Discover magazine, a geneticist was discussing a project sequencing and rebuilding the Neanderthal genome. The end result could be used to literally bring Neanderthals back from extinction.
It was suggested that either a chimp or a human woman volunteer could be used to bring a fetus to term. Frankly, I suspect it would have to be a human to work, and I don't think they will have too much of a problem finding a volunteer.
The article also mentions questions of morality involved in the project.
Perhaps I am profoundly immoral, but I don't really see the issue.
Here are the things I can think of as "problems" for this being, assuming the project were to happen.
1) Psychological - issues around being "the only one of my kind". This assumes that Neanderthals are so profoundly different than us that he/she would fall WELL OUTSIDE the range of human appearance and would feel profoundly isolated.
I don't see how this is any different than people born with severe disabilities or sexually ambiguous genitalia. They too are "outside" the normal set of human experience. Is it immoral to allow them to live?
2) Unforeseen medical problems - We don't know, nor could we know, the full range of medical issues a Neanderthal could have when thrust into the regular world. This could range from the moderate (and almost certain) dietary issues like complete lactose intolerance to severe peanut allergies. They could include a vulnerability to diseases we don't even realize are still present given our robust inherited tolerance developed over thousands of years.
Could this child be born into a "bubble boy" existence? If that is immoral, should we abort any fetus which likewise would be born into such an existence?
3) Playing "God" - Some might object to the fact that we would be bringing a species back from extinction. However, I've never heard anyone raise morality issues around a suggestion that be close the thilacine or the dodo. So, it seems like this is an object to our bringing back specifically a species of human.
Frankly, I don't get the objection. I understand moral issues around "playing God" when were talking about developing weapons which take life away from people. However, in this case we are giving life to something which otherwise would not exist.
In my view "morality" is about depriving someone ELSE of something or forcing unwanted things upon someone. Punching someone who does not want to be punch is immoral. Punching yourself or someone who ASKS you to punch them is not.
One could argue that this being is having "life" forced upon them, but given that they don't exist prior to this event, how can it be immoral?
Anyway, don't know where this should go threadwise, just thought it was an interesting topic for discussion.
Edited by Admin, : Change title.
™ Version 4.2