Hi everyone! It’s my first time posting so let me know if I messed anything up. I would love to get your thoughts on what exactly constitutes a disability (medical definition or social) or if you perceive them negatively. The possible use of germline editing tech to permanently eradicate disabilities is a pretty debatable topic and moral dilemma. There are those who see disabilities as a means to community (Like the deaf), and those who view them as an inconvenience. If we were to even eradicate disabilities, what would this mean for future generations and diversity? Would we be in a never-ending battle of “improving” ourselves? If you are interested in helping my research, please complete my survey in the following link or just communicate on the thread. It’s usually 3-6 mins (my survey). Ethics of Preventing Disabilities | SurveyPlanet . Thank you so much and let me know your thoughts!
1 Like
It’s not debatable to me. If we can then we should. It’s no different than treating an illness. I don’t think anyone would say it isn’t ethical to treat cancer or a Brocken leg. I could see where religious people would consider it “playing God,” though.
Is having two arms instead of four arms a disability? After all, imagine what we could do with four arms each instead of only just two.
If it is a disability, then is it best we permanently eradicate this disability?
So, you seeking clarity around what constitute a ‘disability’, exactly, I find a very good idea.