Poll: If general violence and aggressiveness was found to be linked to a gene

[Kaboose the Moose]

Would you support the genetic modification of all future humans in an effort to remove these traits from human beings? (assuming such a technology became available at some point in time)

The method of this modification isn't relevant but it wouldn't be ably to do these changes to the current population, but if implemented somehow to the next generation (in the form of a virus which can quickly spread throughout the world) these changes could effect all embryos fertilized in the future.

Not only would this significantly reduce or remove general personal aggressiveness and violent behavior but it'd be sure to affect other human traits such as power seeking and dominant behaviors.

Whether you think this would benefit humankind as a whole or not is of course the up for debate.

 

[FeetOfClay]

To start with, discovering a single gene being the cause of all violent behaviour simply is never going to happen, genetics is far, far more complicated than that.
Also, however, I fully support the idea of wholesale genetic engineering, to the point that its my intended career, but even I think that personality modification is completely against basic human rights.

EDIT: Think I should point out, by intended career, I mean researching how to get to that point, I dont particularly expect this stuff to happen in my lifetime.

 

[rokkolpo]

HELL NO, yay for aggressiveness!

that's like taking away passion.

 

[Deleted]

Its just asking for a story about a boy who was left with the gene, being the only one capable of fighting the evil government who is oppressing the land of pacifists.

I say not to remove it because I don't like genetic engineering.

 

[KSarty]

Altering our genes to make us more docile? Yeah I'll go with NO!! on that one.

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

I wouldn't do something like that. It would probably have the unfortunate side-effect of making everyone spineless pussies. And even if it did just remove violent and aggressive behavior, I don't see anything wrong with either of those two so I still wouldn't remove it.

The solution isn't in removing it all together its in controlling those impulses. What's the problem? Um I guess excessive violence and aggression? I really don't know.

 

[2xDouble]

Uh... they already did link violence and aggressiveness to a gene. It's called the Y chromosome. It causes the body to produce testosterone in high quantities, which in turn, increases aggressiveness and predilection towards violence.

And no, I'm okay with keeping it, thanks.

 

[Lazarus Long]

Eliminating genetic predispositions to horrible diseases - definitely. Behaviour modification on the entire human race - we're getting into cartoon supervillain territory here. Besides, it would never happen. Aside from the Lego Genetics issues, we can't even agree on stem cell research. Playing God on this kind of level would never even get past the "thought experiment" phase.

 

[sdMario]

No, genetic modification generally seems like a slippery slope to go down, especially when new-borns are given no choice in their genetic make-up..

 

[Megalodon]

No, genetic modification generally seems like a slippery slope to go down, especially when new-borns are given no choice in their genetic make-up..

Newborns have never had a choice in their genetic make up, I don't really understand that point.
There are many things that I'd like genetic engineering acheive, eliminate diseases like Cystic Fibrosis and Huntingdon's, generally upgrade the human body (personally I'd like some new eyes, the ones I was born with just plain suck) and other cool things.
But removing emotions, even apparently "bad" ones like aggressiveness, we just wouldn't be human anymore.

 

[vanthebaron]

no, agression is needed.

 

[The Shade]

No, they tried that on Serenity. It didn't go well.

Spoiler: And that's how we get Reavers.

 

[Mr.Squishy]

For some reason, reading this instantly reminded me of the tranquil in Dragon Age. Also, hell naw!

 

[Wardnath]

As dysfunctional as my mental state is at the moment, I think I'll take it how it is, thanks.

Also, as several posters have mentioned, this stuff can be wide open to abuse.

It would probably have the unfortunate side-effect of making everyone spineless pussies.

>implying we aren't already

 

[Micah Weil]

On the one hand, it's another step closer to a Total Government Control situation.
On the other hand, hey, no more reality TV.

...I'm a tad bit torn.

 

[Andantil]

Hell no, violence and aggression are fun!

 

[Uncreation]

Interesting question. Well, first of all, i have no problem with genetic engineering. Second of all, i would love to live in a land of pacifists, where no one is violent or aggressive. I'm a REALLY mellow person, and i would rather not have to face things like that. Buut... in the end i still voted maybe. I guess it kind of is interfering with human rights. If a working treatment could be found that could accomplish the same thing on a mature human (like, after the age of consent), i would support that. Then everyone would be free to chose. That would be kind of awesome.

 

[Josho18]

Depends, would the removal of said gene make me become unable to feel boredom? Then yay, i hate boredom.
If not Nay, And screw you for asking.
Thank you dear sir, for setting up Yay and nay as alternatives (I love saying nay).

 

[sdMario]

No, genetic modification generally seems like a slippery slope to go down, especially when new-borns are given no choice in their genetic make-up..

Newborns have never had a choice in their genetic make up, I don't really understand that point.
There are many things that I'd like genetic engineering acheive, eliminate diseases like Cystic Fibrosis and Huntingdon's, generally upgrade the human body (personally I'd like some new eyes, the ones I was born with just plain suck) and other cool things.
But removing emotions, even apparently "bad" ones like aggressiveness, we just wouldn't be human anymore.

By new-borns I meant the next generation, "these changes could effect all embryos fertilized in the future": Why should we have the opportunity to remove an aspect of a whole generations personality?

But I completely agree with you on your point.