Clio Dakolias
Mr. Ippolito
AP Bio C Odd
October 29, 2017
CE 6
Valiño, Álvaro. “How Humans Are Shaping Our Own Evolution.” National Geographic, 14 Apr. 2017, www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/evolution-genetics-medicine-brain-technology-cyborg/.
This week, I read an article from National Geographic, titled “How Humans Are Shaping Our Own Evolution,” by Álvaro Valiño. Humans, and all other species, are the byproducts of millions of years of evolution. Thousands of years ago, humans living in various parts of the world adapted to various environmental differences, such as to living at high altitudes, or to living in a desert climate. Evolution is relentless; when the chance of survival can be increased, it finds a way to make a change—sometimes several different ways. In our world now, the primary mover for reproductive success—and thus evolutionary change—is modern culture and lifestyle, or more specifically: technology. That’s because evolution is no match for the speed and variety of modern life. Despite what evolution has accomplished in the recent past, humans are currently poorly adapted to computer screens, phones, and packed schedules. Neil Harbisson was born with achromatopsia, meaning he could not perceive color, but thanks to advances in technology, he now has a sort of antenna in his head, or a fiber-optic sensor that converts frequencies. One human trait with a strong genetic component continues to increase in value, even more so as technology grows more dominant. The universal ambition of humanity remains greater intelligence. No other attribute is so desirable; no other so useful, so varied in its applications, here and on any world we can imagine. Over hundreds of thousands of years, our genes have evolved to devote more and more resources to our brains, but the truth is, we can never be smart enough. Ray Kurzweil, author of the book The Singularity Is Near, thinks we are on the way to redefining the way we evolve, amplifying ourselves through technology. “We will transcend all of the limitations of our biology. That is what it means to be human—to extend who we are.” IVF, in vitro fertilization, can allow for desirable genes to be implemented in unborn children, meaning parents soon might be able to “design” their baby. A new procedure called CRISPR is a procedure to snip out a section of DNA sequence from a gene and put a different one in, quickly and accurately. What used to take researchers years now takes a fraction of the time, and the manipulation of human genomes is easier than ever.
As genetic modification technologies such as IVF and CRISPR become safer and more reliable, it becomes more and more likely that they will be used on humans soon. But as technologies become more powerful, so does the risk of abuse. This abuse may come in the form of the temptation to try and engineer a perfect human race. Our bodies, our brains, and the machines around us may all one day merge into a single massive communal intelligence. But if there’s one thing natural evolution has shown, it’s that there are many paths to the same goal. We are the animal that tinkers ceaselessly with our own limitations. The evolution of evolution is happening differently, but at the same time. People are following Harbisson's example: instead of going out and conquering technology, they bring it within themselves.
I had no idea that the reality of human evolution was stemmed in genetically modifying technology, and that it could occur so soon. The author did an excellent job at displaying how amazing and problematic this technology can be: it can help with diseases, but can also put so many things about the human race at risk, such as individuality and cultural/ethnical diversity. While many may have ethical questions regarding this technology, it is advancing, and to not use it to its full extent, and try to help people around the world, no matter what the risk, would be a total waste. The author used a lot of sources and different quotes to help back up his point, but he could have described in further detail the advancement of specific technologies such as IVF or CRISPR.
Isabel Sondey
ReplyDeleteValiño, Álvaro. “How Humans Are Shaping Our Own Evolution.” National Geographic, 14 Apr.
2017,
www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/04/evolution-genetics-medicine-brain-tech
nology-cyborg/.
Overall, Clio’s review of the article titled “How Humans Are Shaping Our Own Evolution” was a strong one. Clio adopts a very fluid structure in her report, first presenting the article’s central thesis and then backing up the claim with several clear, specific examples. She first addresses the assertion of the author that technology is seemingly beating evolution in the race to expand the capabilities of human beings. Clio follows this argument with explanation of a man with achromatopsia, or the inability to perceive color, yet has a near-normal life due to the development of an antennae to convert frequencies and perform the functions that his brain cannot. Next, Clio’s comment on the article is a very clear and understandable one which makes the article’s central claim, which is a sophisticated one, seem logical. She breaks down the concept of evolution and its purpose, discussing how its primary goal over the course of time has been to make more efficient use of the human brain and its capabilities. She discusses newly-developed IFR, used for parents to add certain desirable traits to their unborn offspring, and CRISPR, a method used for manipulation of the human genome, technology in support of her claim, which she is also able to do in a comprehensible, simplistic manner that makes it easy for the audience to understand. Clio also effectively addresses both the positive and negative consequences to using and continuing to develop such technologies. She discusses how it would be a waste of resources to give up in developing new and powerful technologies that could better the lives of so many people worldwide, yet these technologies develop with the risk of abuse, which could come in the form of an attempt to engineer a “master race.”
While Clio’s comment is a very strong one, it does lack in direct quotes from the article. In her review of the article, she mentions that the author did include numerous quotes from experts on the subject and cited several sources, she does not include any quotes directly from the article to support her argument. In order to further her point, she could include some textual evidence from the article or used some of the quotes from experts that the author included in the article. Additionally, Clio didn’t thoroughly discuss the implications that technology may have in the future, and how it will alter human development in the years to come. Clio effectively introduced some modern technologies, IVF and CRISPR, and how these are altering the development of the human race, although she doesn’t include any insights into how future technological developments will rival the evolutionary processes. Discussion of a few of technology’s long-term impact on the development of the human race and how relate to evolution could provide the reader with a more holistic understanding of the topic at hand.
I was immediately drawn to this article since it discusses human evolution and technology, both of which apply directly to me. I find it very interesting to read about how our bodies and minds have developed over time to better serve our needs, and I also find it interesting to read about the impact of technology, seeing as I use it so frequently in my everyday life. This article included both of these interests, comparing them in a way. This article helped better my understanding of both the upsides and downsides to technological development and how it alters human development, and will continue to do so. In fact, technology appears to be more effective and efficient in meeting the needs of people than evolutionary processes by which people develop certain necessary or useful functions. This article provides people with a deeper understanding of technology and its consequences, allowing them to consider the ethics of implementing these technologies.