In this blog post, we explore an era in which human intellectual ability transcends the limits of nature to create life. Can we truly become new gods?
What do you think is humanity’s greatest strength? Most people would answer “intellectual ability.” The familiar depiction of monkeys evolving into humans over time best illustrates natural selection. In other words, natural selection is the theory that organisms evolve in ways that favor survival as time passes. On Earth, where evolution through natural selection was once the only accepted process, human “intellectual ability” is now bringing about change. Human intellectual ability has gone beyond the use of tools and the development of language; it has now reached the stage of redesigning and recreating nature itself.
For example, a photograph showing an ear made of bovine cartilage growing on the back of a mouse is no longer a fantastical creature like the Chimera from Greek and Roman mythology. As humans began studying the genes of organisms, they discovered methods to manipulate them. As humans began creating organisms in the forms they desired, a concept of “intelligent design”—distinct from the theory of natural selection—began to emerge. This intelligent design has brought about innovative changes not only in the physical characteristics of living beings but also in their functional aspects.
There are three ways to explain natural selection through intelligent design: first, biotechnology; second, cyborg engineering; and third, inorganic engineering. A cyborg is an entity that combines organic and inorganic matter. Organic matter refers to substances containing carbon (C), while inorganic matter refers to nutrients that do not contain carbon (C). These three approaches present ways for humans to transcend nature and create new forms of life.
Technologies centered on biotechnology always raise ethical concerns. Scientists’ attempts to replace nature’s role with science have come as a shock to many people. Furthermore, numerous animal rights activists raise issues by advocating for animals subjected to experiments against their will. Human rights activists fear that genetic engineering might create beings capable of dominating humanity. As a result, we tend to limit genetic manipulation to plants, fungi, bacteria, and insects. By manipulating the genes of E. coli and various species of fungi, we have produced insulin, which has been instrumental in making diabetes treatment widely accessible. Using genes extracted from Arctic fish, we have created potatoes that can withstand frost.
The targets of genetic manipulation are not limited to living organisms. It would be possible to map the genes of a mammoth preserved in Siberian ice, swap them with the DNA of a living elephant’s zygote, and implant it back into a female elephant’s womb. Using a similar principle, we could map Neanderthal genes and create a Neanderthal baby. Neanderthals, with their superior physical abilities, would likely be highly preferred in various fields, such as manufacturing, opening up the possibility of redefining the concept of human labor. Such technological advancements are sparking significant interest and controversy not only among scientists but also among the general public.
The potential benefits that biotechnology can bring to humanity are driving extensive research, despite countless objections. Ultimately, genetic manipulation—which was previously limited to fungi and insects—will evolve into research involving humans, and the likelihood of Homo sapiens undergoing transformation will increase significantly. However, at the same time, awareness of the ethical and social issues that such technology could cause must also grow.
On the other hand, biotechnology does not always lead to positive outcomes. After all, the responsibility for those problems must ultimately be borne by the researchers conducting the work. Despite the fact that many ethical issues arise and that animal cloning has been successfully achieved, research on humans is not being conducted. Naturally, there would be significant international condemnation and backlash from various human rights organizations. While this may seem like something out of a movie, if humans were to create a perfect organism that surpasses humans, unimaginable events would occur—and realistically, such an era is gradually approaching, not just as a plot in a movie. Or perhaps the technology exists, but we are simply choosing not to attempt it.
I, too, am majoring in a field related to life sciences, and so I sometimes have these thoughts, but I always end up back at square one. It seems it will be one of two things: either we start, or we see it through to the end. In particular, it is extremely rare for research to be abandoned midway. Unless years have been invested without yielding any results, there is no case where research is stopped when sufficient results are already being produced. Ultimately, once research begins and is backed by the necessary technology, as mentioned earlier, the outcome rests entirely with humanity. If the generation that created the problem cannot solve it, it will be passed down to future generations. When I think about it, the issue of life science research sometimes strikes me as similar to that of nuclear fuel. I believe the points of contention regarding spent nuclear waste and biotechnology research are quite similar.
Ultimately, human intellectual capacity bestows upon us infinite possibilities and, at the same time, a profound responsibility. While the future brought about by scientific discoveries and technological advancements is limitless, the ethical and social dilemmas resulting from them are also unavoidable challenges. We must never forget that the power to make our own choices is the greatest—and most dangerous—power of all.
