Hypothetical prodigy offspring - 1000$

Prodigy child?


  • Total voters
    34
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
4,756
Inspired by that child prodigy who thinks in a fourth dimension and must think of everyone else as ********.

Would you pay 1000$ for hormonal/genetic therapy to make your child (during pregnancy) a prodigy? Genius guaranteed, just a minor risk of slight autism. The next step in human evolution. Your child would be chanceless against other prodigies unless you do it.

edit:

Link to video.
 
no.

neither to be the perfect football player, or the greatest voice. or anything.
 
Nope, as being accustomed to too many advantages weakens human beings. Maybe I'd consider a therapy that would make my child capable of becoming a prodigy, though he or she still would have learn everything like every other child.
 
No. I would do nothing to endanger my child... that chance of autism would be that.
 
I don't think so.
1. He'd be a smartass
2. I could risk harming him
3. I'd like my son to be, you know, natural.
4. I have better uses for $1000
 
Leaving away the autism part, I'd definately go for it, don't see any cons and a ton of pros.

With the autism, I would need the actual probability as well as some experience with autism prior to making that decision.
 
I would not have a child, but I think choosing to augment your child is the more moral choice.

Consider the strict converse: would you pay money to reduce your child's chances of autism, but guarantee a low IQ?

I'd think not! But then we're left in the middle, assuming that the 'natural' result is the best. That's just not true.
 
Yes; if we can improve ourselves, why shouldn't we?
 
Depends what other people are doing. I'd not want my kid to fall behind the curve if everyone is having super kids.
 
Yes. And I'd have his skeleton replaced with adamantium.
 
Have you ever seen the movie Gattaca?

I like Gattaca, but it's more a critique of the class system that would emerge rather than of human augmentation itself, i.e. it's directed towards the society rather than the technology.
 
I like Gattaca, but it's more a critique of the class system that would emerge rather than of human augmentation itself, i.e. it's directed towards the society rather than the technology.

That's exactly the problem though. Only the rich could afford augmentation for their children, and we'd end up with a creepy 2-class society where the top {whatever}% are super fit, super intelligent, and have extended lifespans, while the rest of us remain human.

It wouldn't result in an improvement of the human race, it would result in a further and rather extreme stratification of society.
 
That's exactly the problem though. Only the rich could afford augmentation for their children, and we'd end up with a creepy 2-class society where the top {whatever}% are super fit, super intelligent, and have extended lifespans, while the rest of us remain human.

It wouldn't result in an improvement of the human race, it would result in a further and rather extreme stratification of society.
on the other hand, if that augmentation is able for everyone; It would be like making human beings, the parents would choose for their children their eye color, IQ, height, whatever.
Thats not having a son, is something else.. like another commodity.
 
Back
Top Bottom