In this blog post, we take an in-depth look at whether the end of Homo sapiens is inevitable destruction or the beginning of a new evolution through biotechnology.
Most of us have probably wondered at least once in our childhood how the dinosaurs went extinct. We likely wondered what could have happened during the era when dinosaurs ruled the Earth to cause these massive creatures to vanish in an instant. Of course, no one knows exactly how the dinosaurs went extinct. But we assume that something terrible must have happened back then. We imagine that the age of the dinosaurs came to an end as an asteroid struck, volcanoes erupted, food sources vanished, and the creatures shivered in the cold. Such imaginings evoke scenes of catastrophe straight out of a movie. So, it’s hardly surprising that when we hear talk of the end of humanity being near, we naturally picture a scene from a disaster movie. But will the end of humanity—or, to be more specific, the end of Homo sapiens—necessarily lead to the horrific outcomes we imagine? Perhaps there are other scenarios. Let’s explore a slightly different ending that we, Homo sapiens, might face.
Like all other species, we Homo sapiens will eventually face extinction. This is a law of nature, and that day could be in the distant future—or perhaps the near future, just around the corner. But what if we could choose that day ourselves? Our distant ancestors, such as Australopithecus and Homo erectus, also went extinct, but that was not necessarily a tragic event. They simply evolved naturally and gradually into us, Homo sapiens. If we, too, were to meet our end while evolving into a different species in that way, it would be a rather decent conclusion. But there is a crucial difference between them and us: we can predict and determine when and how that day will come. Our understanding of biotechnology can enable us to determine the direction of our evolution.
First, let’s think deeply about biotechnology. To properly understand the impact biotechnology will have on human evolution, we first need to understand the theory of evolution. “Survival of the fittest” is the version of evolutionary theory we commonly know. However, this phrase contains a major misunderstanding of evolutionary theory. So what is the true theory of evolution? Let’s look at a simple example. We know that wolves evolved into dogs. Of course, this is not an entirely accurate statement. To be precise, we should say that among the wild animal populations of the past, those that remained in the wild became today’s wolves, while some that chose to live in symbiosis with humans became dogs. However, those animals of the past were undoubtedly much more similar to wolves than to today’s dogs. But does this really mean that the Poodle wagging its tail beside me right now is “stronger” than those wolves in the mountains? No, it does not. Dogs simply have easier access to food and live in a safer environment than wolves. In other words, they simply have an advantage when it comes to survival. Using this, we can redefine the theory of evolution as follows: “Animals with an advantage in survival live longer.” This is a very obvious statement, and one that can be applied to countless diverse fields beyond animals—such as products, companies, culture, and society.
So how might advances in biotechnology influence human evolution? The answer lies in artificial selection. Let’s revisit the example of dogs mentioned earlier. Human influence played a significant role in ensuring that Poodles survived to this day without being outcompeted by animals like wolves. They did not survive because they were selected by the harsh laws of the wild, but because they were selected by humans. There are many such examples. The domestication of cows and chickens is one such example, and furthermore, crops like barley and rice are also products of artificial selection. Inducing changes in living organisms through artificial selection—this is biotechnology. And if humans become the subject of this biotechnology, it will result in the evolution of humankind.
This raises an interesting question: If humans choose to evolve through artificial selection, what will the end result look like? Will we face extinction due to environmental changes, like the dinosaurs, or will we transform into a new species and continue life in a different form? These questions suggest that the development of biotechnology is not merely a technological advancement but a critical factor that could determine the fate of humanity.
However, doubts remain. As we saw earlier, artificial selection has been practiced since ancient times, so why is human evolution only now on the horizon? The primary reason is that humans in the past did not understand the process of evolution. Our ancestors did not intentionally breed docile, hardworking cattle to domesticate wild cattle. They simply raised those cattle because they were the only ones of practical value. In other words, artificial selection up to that point was not significantly different from natural selection. But that was not the only problem. After the publication of Darwin’s *On the Origin of Species* in 1859, the idea of using it to “evolve” humans, society, and culture led to extremely dangerous consequences—ranging from the anti-human rights eugenics movement in the United States in the early 20th century to the Nazi genocide of Jews during World War II.
However, the situation is different now. Advances in genetic engineering—a branch of biotechnology—have resolved many of the problems associated with human evolution through biotechnology. Genetic engineering is the field that studies how genes, which can be considered the blueprints of living organisms, function during the evolutionary process. As this field has developed, we have become capable of evolving humanity in a much more direct and precise manner. In other words, we have moved beyond artificial selection to the realm of intelligent design. Let’s consider the difference between the periods before and after the development of genetic engineering using an analogy. In the past, when we built mechanical devices, the only method available was to haphazardly assemble parts, keeping only those machines that functioned as intended and discarding all others. This was not only highly unproductive but also unethical when one considers that the items being discarded were not machines but human beings. However, the advancement of genetic engineering has allowed us to understand the function of each individual component, and as a result, we can now create various machines—such as laptops, computers, and TVs—exactly as we desire. In this way, evolution supported by genetic engineering knowledge will proceed at a speed that is on a completely different level from evolution as we have known it. And we are already seeing evidence of this through genetically modified foods.
Of course, many people still raise ethical concerns. Among them, the most common are: “People with inferior genes will be marginalized,” or “All of humanity will become homogenized.” However, this will now become a matter of choice. Over the past millions of years, humans had to survive in a harsh natural environment, and as a result, the bipedal creatures ‘selected’ by nature became the humans we are today. But whether we remain Homo sapiens as we are today, or evolve into a new life form that can no longer be called Homo sapiens, will be the result of our own “choice.” So, will this evolution driven by biotechnology truly turn us into a species different from Homo sapiens? That, too, depends on our choice. Even if we were to decide to remain Homo sapiens forever, that would no longer be the result of adapting to the laws of nature, but rather the result of our own choice. Science has already opened up every possibility to us. Perhaps we can already be viewed as a new species that has shifted the destiny of our species from nature’s “selection” to our own “choice”?
