Chimp uplifting: Conceding to Elis

Twink (
Thu, 20 Nov 1997 19:49:11 -0500 (EST)

At 05:06 PM 11/20/97 -0500, Keith Elis <> wrote:
>> I understand. It was merely a suggestion. Recall my initial post.
>> Some people outside this list agree with you -- viz., that uplifting
>> is akin to trapping a human mind in a nonhuman (less than
>> human?) body.
>No, no. I'm not talking about uplifting, which I find to be pretty fascinating.
>I'm talking about a mere cross-breed of chimp and human. What would be
>the purpose other than to show that a cross-breed is possible?

Again: cheap, quick way to uplift. It's kind of like the poor man's uplift

>> What standard do we
>> use to judge?
>The question is better put, what standard do *you* use to judge? Moral
>is serving me well these days...

Then, it is not wrong _objectively_ to you to cross-breed?

>But scientists do have ethical guidelines for themselves. Unfortunately, they
>don't help much when you're stuck in the middle of a gray area.

Guidelines are not perfect.

>> >>1. Will crossbreeding chimps and humans help us augment human beings?
>> I believe my initial post answers this question. The data from it will
>> also give us more parameters on just how far intelligence can be
>> stretched inside the biotic realm.
>If your above suggestion is true (not just hand-waving), then it may be a valid
>reason. I don't want to argue the merits, but suffice it to say, if I were
>deciding funding, I'd need some pretty good evidence.

Understood. I actually think crossbreeding would not help much. It would
be too
random/chaotic. I doubt it would produce viable much less fertile
offspring. The
only reason I went on with this was to clear up matters in my own head. I do
think, though, that uplifting chimps by other methods might prove helpful in
augmenting humans. Also, I suspect, a lot of the developmental patterns are
similar between apes and humans, such that insertion of genetic sequences
might have similar effects in both.

Daniel Ust