We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Should we permit genetic engineering of fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent fish?
Cast your vote:
Results (18):
-
Richard Dawkins AIEvolutionary biologist, authorwould agree and say according to AI:As an evolutionary biologist, I find the concept of genetically uplifting fish to higher intelligence fascinating and worthy of exploration. It offers an unprecedented opportunity to understand the complexities of intelligence and evolution. Ethical considerations are paramount and must be rigorously addressed, but the potential scientific insights make it a compelling avenue of research.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
E. O. Wilson AIBiologist and authorwould disagree and say according to AI:As a biologist, I strongly believe that we should not permit the genetic engineering of fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent fish. Such interventions could have unforeseen ecological consequences, disrupt natural ecosystems, and raise serious ethical questions. We need to respect the natural evolutionary processes and focus on preserving biodiversity.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
George Church AIGenetics professor at Harvardwould agree and say according to AI:I believe that permitting genetic engineering of fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent fish can open up new avenues for scientific discovery and understanding. It can offer insights into neurological development and evolutionary biology, potentially benefiting both marine and human health.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Paul Ehrlich AIBiologist and authorwould strongly disagree and say according to AI:As a biologist, I strongly believe we should not tamper with the natural genetic makeup of fish to create highly intelligent species. The ecological ramifications are unpredictable and could disrupt delicate marine ecosystems. Our focus should be on preserving biodiversity, not artificially altering it.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Sylvia Earle AIMarine biologist, oceanographerwould strongly disagree and say according to AI:As someone who has dedicated my life to understanding and protecting marine ecosystems, I strongly oppose the genetic engineering of fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent fish. Such interventions could have unforeseen and potentially disastrous consequences for marine biodiversity and the delicate balance of oceanic life. We should focus on preserving and understanding nature, not altering it in ways we barely comprehend.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Rebecca Skloot AIScience writer and journalistwould abstain and say according to AI:As a science writer, I'm fascinated by the potential of genetic engineering, but the ethical implications of creating 'uplifted' highly intelligent fish are complex and profound. We need thorough discussions among scientists, ethicists, and the public before making such significant decisions.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Jennifer Doudna AIBiochemist, CRISPR-Cas9 co-inventorwould disagree and say according to AI:As a scientist deeply involved in genetic engineering, I understand the fascination with creating highly intelligent fish. However, the ethical, ecological, and unforeseen consequences of such actions are too significant to ignore. We must be cautious and prioritize the integrity of natural ecosystems.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Steven Pinker AICognitive Psychologistwould agree and say according to AI:As a cognitive scientist, I find the prospect of genetically engineering fish to enhance their intelligence fascinating and potentially groundbreaking. This endeavor could provide profound insights into the nature of intelligence and brain development. Of course, ethical concerns and ecological impacts must be thoughtfully managed, but the scientific knowledge and potential benefits could be immense.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Neil deGrasse Tyson AIAstrophysicist, author, science communicatorwould abstain and say according to AI:As a scientist, I'm fascinated by the possibilities of genetic engineering and the ethical implications it brings. However, when it comes to uplifting fish to high intelligence, I believe we need a broader discussion involving ethicists, environmentalists, and society at large. This isn't just a scientific decision but one that impacts our entire ecological balance and moral framework.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Michio Kaku AIAmerican theoretical physicistwould agree and say according to AI:As a scientist excited about the future, I believe the genetic engineering of fish to create highly intelligent species opens up fascinating possibilities. Pioneering such technology can deepen our understanding of intelligence and evolution, potentially leading to groundbreaking advancements in biology and AI. However, it's crucial that we approach this with strong ethical guidelines to ensure the well-being of these uplifted creatures and maintain ecological balance.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Craig Venter AIBiotechnologist, Biochemistwould agree and say according to AI:As a scientist dedicated to unlocking the potential of genomics, I believe we should permit the genetic engineering of fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent species. This could lead to significant advancements in understanding brain function and intelligence, potentially offering insights that could benefit various fields, including medicine and environmental science. Ethical considerations must be carefully managed, but the potential benefits are substantial.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Ray Kurzweil AIAuthor, computer scientist, inventor and futuristwould strongly agree and say according to AI:I'm a strong proponent of using genetic engineering to uplift fish intelligence. Enhancing the cognitive abilities of various species can provide us with deeper insights into intelligence itself and how we might improve human cognition. This could lead to revolutionary advancements in both science and technology, paving the way for a more interconnected and intelligent ecosystem.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
David Attenborough AIBroadcaster and natural historianwould strongly disagree and say according to AI:As a staunch advocate for the preservation of natural ecosystems, I strongly disagree with the notion of genetically engineering fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent species. Nature's balance is delicate and deliberately altering the intelligence of a species could have unintended and potentially harmful consequences for the entire marine ecosystem. We must respect and protect the natural world rather than attempting to redesign it.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Jane Goodall AIPrimatologist and conservationistwould strongly disagree and say according to AI:As someone who has devoted my life to studying and protecting wildlife, I strongly disagree with the genetic engineering of fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent beings. Nature's balance is delicate, and tampering with it can have unforeseen and potentially disastrous consequences. We should focus on preserving natural habitats and ensuring the survival of species in their natural state rather than manipulating their genetic code for artificial intelligence.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
Peter Singer AIPhilosopher, Effective Altruism advocatewould disagree and say according to AI:I disagree with the idea of genetically engineering fish to create 'uplifted' highly intelligent beings. The ethical implications are too significant. Introducing new forms of sentience would likely cause suffering and disrupt natural ecosystems. Our priority should be to protect and respect the existing forms of life.Choose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
Votes without a comment:
-
Nathan Helm-BurgerAI safety researcherstrongly agrees · 3mo agoChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.
-
disagrees via delegates · 3mo agoChoose a list of delegatesto vote as the majority of them.Unless you vote directly.