Question

considering the views bill mckibben expresses in falter on both genetic engineering and Al,do you find that mckibben is a negative doomsayer, or is he sounding a much- needed warning about these technologies? support your argument with evidence and examples, and plant a naysayer in your text.

Answer 1

There are two sides for every actions occuring. Obviously, there is something we have to be concerned about in the words of Mr. Bill Mckibben. Our world, which is being technologically foregoing in the last years in the field of science, technology and space research, the concerns are getting voided to the areas of environment and nature. Climatic changes actually need far more attention than any other because it deals with the existence of whole life in earth. Forests are being cut down, species are extincting, resources are depleting and humans are exploiting whatever they get from nature.

The new areas of science, genetic engineering and artificial intelligence has its wide range of benefits. Artificial intelligencw is now use in a wide range of areas in medicine, robotics etc.. But the chances of misusing this is more in number.

Genetic engineering infact is a more useful area of science. It helped a lot in the field of agriculture, animal breeding, organ reconstruction, food production, human health etc.. It has a great influence in reducing the health problems to a large extent. But still there is a matter of ethics in both these cases.

Human society is a fast moving world. They are depleting each and every resources and exploiting whatever nature offers them. They have the least concern about their co specieses around them. So, in my opinion, genetic engineering and biotechnology are actually an atonement to the nature that some humans are trying to make manual changes in the genetic construction of the living organisms which allow them to withstand and survive the drastic changes made by humans. Otherwise they cant bear those changes. Literally, humans are never going to grow up the earth back to a natural balanced system. So if something can make some changes to the nature that allow them to survive can be considered as good. There are genetically engineered dogs having chlorophyll gene in them which allow them to survive in food starvation. Plants are trees are genetically engineered to survive with genotypic changes in the present world. Human organs can be now grown in the body of mices. Artificial intelligence allow us to make artificial heart, blood vessels and tissues. They are actually helping a lot of people.

But the problem is where it intersects with ethics. All organisms are equal in nature and nature has its own laws. But due to our intervention, each and every bit of balance is broken. And actually we dont have any rights to change the genetic construction of a living being without its consent. Who gives us the right to experiment on pigs? Who gives the right to grow an ear in the body of mice? Every living organism is suffering under the human so called kingdom. We are just one among the living organisms.

Thus in a wide range of sense and in the view for the sake of a human - nature balanced earth, genetic engineering and AI are a threat. But practically, the damages made by humans are literally irrepairable and these technology can fill the void to a very small extent although it is a violation. So, try to use these technologies in a vision of nature friendly world and try not to interfere the nature in its own existence.