Team:HebrewU/Ethics
Hebrew- Project
- Lab
- Human Practices
- Team
- Judging
The Ethos of Science:
How contemporary scientific discoveries are viewed by the Faithful in the Holy Land.
Religion is as central a feature of Israel today as it has been for thousands of years. The vast number of holy sites found scattered across Israel actually date back to the times of Jesus, King David, and Muhammad, inspiring the pilgrimage of millions of followers from all kinds of religions to this day. Some of the premier religious figures in the world today reside in Israel, building vibrant communities and establishing religious governance. And yet, modernity, science and even atheism seem to thrive here as well, alongside the ancient religions.
We interviewed religious leaders from several of the major denominations, including a leader of the Atheist community in Israel, about some of the grey areas surrounding religion and science, such as genetic manipulations, experimentation on living creatures and hyper-advancements in technology. Click below to view the transcripts from these remarkable exchanges.
Judaism
Genetically Engineered Plants and Halacha[1] - Rabbi Goldschmidt
Rabbi Professor Eliezer Goldschmidt is a researcher at the Faculty of Agriculture. His main focus is on the genetics of citrus fruit. In addition to his research, he serves as a community Rabbi in the city of Modi'in. One of Rabbi Goldschmidt’s goals is to deepen our understanding of genetic engineering within the context of Jewish law.
[1] Jewish Law.
[1] Jewish Law.
How does Judaism view genetic engineering in general?
We understand that the world is evolving towards genetic engineering; we already have plant species of this nature being used in Israel. Despite the rapid progress of our use of genetic engineering in recent years, a final ruling has not yet been issued on behalf of the Chief Rabbinate[2]. I believe there is a need to discuss it due to the sensitive nature [of the topic] and because of our desire to connect the intention of Jewish Halachah [from thousands of years ago] with modern issues.
What are some halachic issues that might arise in relation to genetic engineering?
Each subject in and of itself is very complex and requires extensive study, so we will deal only with some of the major issues we currently face:
Firstly, is genetic engineering an improper intervention of man in God's act of creation? The Torah prohibits practices called "Kala'im", for example, which include grafting plants, planting seeds of different plant species too close to each other, and the mating, or “hybridization”, of different species of animals [i.e. mules]. Additionally, questions about Kashrut arise, such as: If we insert genetic material from an animal into a plant, does the transgenic plant contain animal material?[3]
How can we start to resolve each of these issues?
The prohibition includes the creation of a mixture of different species, such as planting [different species] in a field without separation [between the plants] and the grafting of different plant species. In genetic engineering, if we take DNA from the same species [of plant] that contains the desired genetic information [and then insert that DNA into a new plant], there is no problem with the prohibition of hybrids. On the other hand, if we insert DNA from a separate species, we may enter a problematic area in terms of Halacha. It should be noted that in the vast majority of transformations, the segment that is inserted is not the original segment but rather replicated within bacteria or synthesized and only then transferred to the target [as such this could bypass the law as it is understood today].
Regarding the possible intervention of the "act of creation", the Ramban [4], in his commentary on the Torah, wrote that the prohibition of "Kala'im" stems from the fact that God does not want man to interfere in creation or act contrary to nature. The reasoning being that, through this act, man claims that the world is not good enough. Creating new species is contrary to the belief that God created a perfect world. Despite this, today we know [outside of genetic engineering] there naturally exists an exchange of genetic material in nature, such as viruses, bacteria, transposomes, and many more.
Do you support implementing genetic engineering to solve environmental issues?
udaism holds a strong interest in preserving nature and not destroying the environment. In Kohelet Rabba 7:28 God said to Adam, "See my deeds, how beautiful and wonderful they are, and all that I created for you I created, give your mind that you will not spoil and destroy my world." In my opinion there will [eventually] be permission from the Rabbinate to employ genetic engineering; though, scientists should exercise great caution in order not to harm our ecosystem.
Generally, in the field of biomedical technology, there is a clear tendency in the halachic ruling to facilitate the use of new techniques, genetic engineering included. This view is based on the understanding that it is necessary to help both patients who are ill as well as those with other medical conditions, such as infertility, for example. Through these rulings in the medical world, it is possible to pave the way and permit genetic engineering and synthetic biology in plants.
It is important to say that this discussion is meant as food for thought, and in no way is it my intention to determine actual practice.
[1] Israel’s authority on religious issues.
[2] It is not kosher to eat meat and dairy together, would this plant be considered meat?
[3] Medieval Jewish scholar and philosopher, known also by Nachmanides.
We understand that the world is evolving towards genetic engineering; we already have plant species of this nature being used in Israel. Despite the rapid progress of our use of genetic engineering in recent years, a final ruling has not yet been issued on behalf of the Chief Rabbinate[2]. I believe there is a need to discuss it due to the sensitive nature [of the topic] and because of our desire to connect the intention of Jewish Halachah [from thousands of years ago] with modern issues.
What are some halachic issues that might arise in relation to genetic engineering?
Each subject in and of itself is very complex and requires extensive study, so we will deal only with some of the major issues we currently face:
Firstly, is genetic engineering an improper intervention of man in God's act of creation? The Torah prohibits practices called "Kala'im", for example, which include grafting plants, planting seeds of different plant species too close to each other, and the mating, or “hybridization”, of different species of animals [i.e. mules]. Additionally, questions about Kashrut arise, such as: If we insert genetic material from an animal into a plant, does the transgenic plant contain animal material?[3]
How can we start to resolve each of these issues?
The prohibition includes the creation of a mixture of different species, such as planting [different species] in a field without separation [between the plants] and the grafting of different plant species. In genetic engineering, if we take DNA from the same species [of plant] that contains the desired genetic information [and then insert that DNA into a new plant], there is no problem with the prohibition of hybrids. On the other hand, if we insert DNA from a separate species, we may enter a problematic area in terms of Halacha. It should be noted that in the vast majority of transformations, the segment that is inserted is not the original segment but rather replicated within bacteria or synthesized and only then transferred to the target [as such this could bypass the law as it is understood today].
Regarding the possible intervention of the "act of creation", the Ramban [4], in his commentary on the Torah, wrote that the prohibition of "Kala'im" stems from the fact that God does not want man to interfere in creation or act contrary to nature. The reasoning being that, through this act, man claims that the world is not good enough. Creating new species is contrary to the belief that God created a perfect world. Despite this, today we know [outside of genetic engineering] there naturally exists an exchange of genetic material in nature, such as viruses, bacteria, transposomes, and many more.
Do you support implementing genetic engineering to solve environmental issues?
udaism holds a strong interest in preserving nature and not destroying the environment. In Kohelet Rabba 7:28 God said to Adam, "See my deeds, how beautiful and wonderful they are, and all that I created for you I created, give your mind that you will not spoil and destroy my world." In my opinion there will [eventually] be permission from the Rabbinate to employ genetic engineering; though, scientists should exercise great caution in order not to harm our ecosystem.
Generally, in the field of biomedical technology, there is a clear tendency in the halachic ruling to facilitate the use of new techniques, genetic engineering included. This view is based on the understanding that it is necessary to help both patients who are ill as well as those with other medical conditions, such as infertility, for example. Through these rulings in the medical world, it is possible to pave the way and permit genetic engineering and synthetic biology in plants.
It is important to say that this discussion is meant as food for thought, and in no way is it my intention to determine actual practice.
[1] Israel’s authority on religious issues.
[2] It is not kosher to eat meat and dairy together, would this plant be considered meat?
[3] Medieval Jewish scholar and philosopher, known also by Nachmanides.
Christianity
Genetic Engineering and christianity - Ms. Siba Ismail
Siba is a student for religious Studies in the faculty of Humanities at Tel Aviv University.
What is Christianity's view towards genetic engineering in general?
Seeing as the field of genetic engineering was not known at the time the holy book (The New Testament) was written, it’s hard to draw upon it as a reference. Therefore, in order to determine the Christian view towards genetic engineering we must establish guiding principles through which we’d be able to look at the subject.
- Creation was placed under human care (Genesis 1: 28; 2: 15-20).
- The Bible also tells us that creation was also influenced by our sin and its viability awaits the influence of sin. (Genesis 3: 17-19; Romans 8: 19-21),
It is possible to conclude that humans, being responsible for creation, have an obligation to "fix" the influence of sin and try to reset things by any possible means. Therefore, this follows that any scientific progress can be used to improve creation.
What would be considered the chief concern or issue regarding this field of science?
The most important element in the field of genetic engineering is clearly the responsibility of mankind towards the integrity of our bodies and the rest of creation. We have been given dominion over the earth, therefore we must respect nature and not harm it.
There is no doubt that the holy book encourages us to take care of our bodies:
- The Book of Proverbs cites certain activities for restoring the health of an individual (Proverbs 12:18).
- The Apostle Paul says that we have a special duty to take care of our bodies (Ephesians 5:29).
- Timothy, Apostle Paul's disciple encouraged curing his illness (Timothy 5:23).
- The believers bear the responsibility to use their bodies in moderation being a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19, 20).
- We show our faith in offering help to those who have basic physical needs (James 2:16).
Therefore, as believers we must care about our bodies health as well as the health and safety of others.
Are there any other concerns regarding this field?
There are a few issues that contradict Christianity which are found in the use of genetic engineering. The fear that genetic engineering would play a greater role than God bestowed upon us as agents of His creation.
- The holy book says that all things were created through God and for Him (Colossians 1:16).
- God shaped living beings to produce certain "species" (Genesis 1: 11-25).
The manipulation of genetic traits (alteration of breeds) can be an interference in matters that are the exclusive domain of the Creator. There is concern that the tremendous efforts invested in achieving advances in the field of genetic engineering is a challenge to God.
- In the story of the tower of Babel, mankind was united, however they were not obedient to God; as a result, God stopped their advances (Genesis 11: 1-9). This shows what happens when mankind attempts to glorify itself above the Creator. God certainly knew that there were a few dangers in the direction that people were walking towards. - A similar warning may be found in the book of Romans where by it is described what happens to those who don’t follow God’s rules and worship created things (Stones, Figurines and so forth), (Romans 1: 18-32) .
What we fear here is that genetic engineering may encourage the development of similar motivations and thus reach similar results.
Seeing as the field of genetic engineering was not known at the time the holy book (The New Testament) was written, it’s hard to draw upon it as a reference. Therefore, in order to determine the Christian view towards genetic engineering we must establish guiding principles through which we’d be able to look at the subject.
- Creation was placed under human care (Genesis 1: 28; 2: 15-20).
- The Bible also tells us that creation was also influenced by our sin and its viability awaits the influence of sin. (Genesis 3: 17-19; Romans 8: 19-21),
It is possible to conclude that humans, being responsible for creation, have an obligation to "fix" the influence of sin and try to reset things by any possible means. Therefore, this follows that any scientific progress can be used to improve creation.
What would be considered the chief concern or issue regarding this field of science?
The most important element in the field of genetic engineering is clearly the responsibility of mankind towards the integrity of our bodies and the rest of creation. We have been given dominion over the earth, therefore we must respect nature and not harm it.
There is no doubt that the holy book encourages us to take care of our bodies:
- The Book of Proverbs cites certain activities for restoring the health of an individual (Proverbs 12:18).
- The Apostle Paul says that we have a special duty to take care of our bodies (Ephesians 5:29).
- Timothy, Apostle Paul's disciple encouraged curing his illness (Timothy 5:23).
- The believers bear the responsibility to use their bodies in moderation being a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19, 20).
- We show our faith in offering help to those who have basic physical needs (James 2:16).
Therefore, as believers we must care about our bodies health as well as the health and safety of others.
Are there any other concerns regarding this field?
There are a few issues that contradict Christianity which are found in the use of genetic engineering. The fear that genetic engineering would play a greater role than God bestowed upon us as agents of His creation.
- The holy book says that all things were created through God and for Him (Colossians 1:16).
- God shaped living beings to produce certain "species" (Genesis 1: 11-25).
The manipulation of genetic traits (alteration of breeds) can be an interference in matters that are the exclusive domain of the Creator. There is concern that the tremendous efforts invested in achieving advances in the field of genetic engineering is a challenge to God.
- In the story of the tower of Babel, mankind was united, however they were not obedient to God; as a result, God stopped their advances (Genesis 11: 1-9). This shows what happens when mankind attempts to glorify itself above the Creator. God certainly knew that there were a few dangers in the direction that people were walking towards. - A similar warning may be found in the book of Romans where by it is described what happens to those who don’t follow God’s rules and worship created things (Stones, Figurines and so forth), (Romans 1: 18-32) .
What we fear here is that genetic engineering may encourage the development of similar motivations and thus reach similar results.
Islam
Genetic Engineering and Islam - Sheikh Hasan Heidar
Sheikh Hasan Haidar is the Imam of the old mosque in I'billin town. He holds a degree in Arabic language and in Islamic Sharia[1]
[1] Islamic Law.
[1] Islamic Law.
How does Islam view genetic engineering?
"In the Name of Allah (God), Most Gracious, Most Merciful. All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger Muhammed."
Responding to your question, genetic engineering is one of the greatest discoveries of our time! All new scientific discoveries that help mitigate the suffering of humanity is welcomed in Islam.
The Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) is reported to have said, “There should be neither harm nor reciprocating injury.”
The eminent Muslim scholar, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states the following: “One of the blessings of Islam is that it never abstracts scientific programs or narrows the scope of our minds in the field of science and technology. Unlike other religions, there is no conflict between science and religion in Islam.”
Do you support using this technology for producing more food in the world?
Yes of course, as I said before, Islam welcomes all new discoveries that make our life easier and help humanity, and producing more food is one option.
Do you support the use of this technology in medicine?
Yes, I do. There are many benefits we can derive from this, say, for instance, treating genetic diseases by using effective genes to prevent harm or disease. This is something commendable in Islam according to the legal rule "Prevention is better than cure"; the rule is taken from the Hadith - “There should be neither harm nor reciprocating injury.”
In Islam, we encourage scientists to continue their research and discover more about our body, to know more about [our bodies and] diseases and how we can “fix” ourselves. But not all is acceptable in Islam. For example, the technology to create designer babies is not accepted in Islam because it does not benefit mankind and may result in tampering with Allah’s creation, with unknown consequences, and for unnecessary reasons. Also, to use this technology to select the gender can lead to imbalances in society, discrimination, and changes to the natural order that Allah has created humankind upon.
Do you support using this technology to solve environmental issues?
Yes! Allah Almighty said in the Koran (Islam’s holy book), “Do you not see that Allah has made subject to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth and amply bestowed upon you His favors, [both] apparent and unapparent? But of the people, it is he who disputes with Allah without knowledge or guidance or an enlightening Book [from Him].” (Luqman 31: 20). Allah gave us a perfect world to live in and we need to keep it in the same condition. So we can use genetic engineering to help solve environmental problems that we caused [to protect this rule]. We welcome the idea of genetic engineering. It is one of the greatest discoveries of our time and is shared by many countries. [Regardless of] whether it is considered more important than the discovery of penicillin or man landing on the moon, we hope it is used for the benefit of humanity and that its guidelines will be [established] according to the views of qualified judges.
"In the Name of Allah (God), Most Gracious, Most Merciful. All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger Muhammed."
Responding to your question, genetic engineering is one of the greatest discoveries of our time! All new scientific discoveries that help mitigate the suffering of humanity is welcomed in Islam.
The Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) is reported to have said, “There should be neither harm nor reciprocating injury.”
The eminent Muslim scholar, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states the following: “One of the blessings of Islam is that it never abstracts scientific programs or narrows the scope of our minds in the field of science and technology. Unlike other religions, there is no conflict between science and religion in Islam.”
Do you support using this technology for producing more food in the world?
Yes of course, as I said before, Islam welcomes all new discoveries that make our life easier and help humanity, and producing more food is one option.
Do you support the use of this technology in medicine?
Yes, I do. There are many benefits we can derive from this, say, for instance, treating genetic diseases by using effective genes to prevent harm or disease. This is something commendable in Islam according to the legal rule "Prevention is better than cure"; the rule is taken from the Hadith - “There should be neither harm nor reciprocating injury.”
In Islam, we encourage scientists to continue their research and discover more about our body, to know more about [our bodies and] diseases and how we can “fix” ourselves. But not all is acceptable in Islam. For example, the technology to create designer babies is not accepted in Islam because it does not benefit mankind and may result in tampering with Allah’s creation, with unknown consequences, and for unnecessary reasons. Also, to use this technology to select the gender can lead to imbalances in society, discrimination, and changes to the natural order that Allah has created humankind upon.
Do you support using this technology to solve environmental issues?
Yes! Allah Almighty said in the Koran (Islam’s holy book), “Do you not see that Allah has made subject to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth and amply bestowed upon you His favors, [both] apparent and unapparent? But of the people, it is he who disputes with Allah without knowledge or guidance or an enlightening Book [from Him].” (Luqman 31: 20). Allah gave us a perfect world to live in and we need to keep it in the same condition. So we can use genetic engineering to help solve environmental problems that we caused [to protect this rule]. We welcome the idea of genetic engineering. It is one of the greatest discoveries of our time and is shared by many countries. [Regardless of] whether it is considered more important than the discovery of penicillin or man landing on the moon, we hope it is used for the benefit of humanity and that its guidelines will be [established] according to the views of qualified judges.
Buddhism
Genetic Engineering and Darma - Amichai BK
Amichai BK, our student research leader, is among other things, a Buddhist practitioner. He has explored many religions and philosophies while practicing Buddhism and meditation for several years. In his few moments away from the lab over the past few months, he consulted a number of predominant Buddhist teachers in Israel; as well as conducting literary research centered around the Pali canon and put together the following essay on Dharma and Synthetic Biology.
The following thoughts are not rooted in a single school of thought or based on a specific text. Like myself, many of the teachers I spoke with grew up in a Jewish or secular setting, and not a Buddhist monastery. As such the views proposed here are Buddhist, but sit on an infrastructure of liberal thought and western moral values.
Ethics in the dharma can often be very general and at the same time situational. There is a foundation of blanket qualities Buddhists strive to cultivate such as empathy, equanimity, and kindness to all living creatures. These can be translated into a moral compass leading to decisions that guided by a continuous effort to ease the suffering of all sentient beings.
Though these guidelines seem clear, more often than not, particular courses of action are not offered for a specific situation. In contrast to other religions, Buddhism did not create an encompassing set of rules for all practitioners. Though the monks have a very strict code of conduct set out, a far-reaching system of rules was not made for lay practitioners. I believe this exists in other religions, as an attempt to sculpt an entire social system, a goal which was not a priority for the Buddha when he began his teachings. As such, even though ethical guidelines are clearly laid out, there is room for interpretation and the development of Buddhist ethics, allowing them to evolve and remain relevant in changing times.
Through this lens, I began to dive into the ethical questions that are associated with biological research. As the first precept in Buddhism is to abstain from killing, or even harming all living beings, a central question that arises, is on the topic of animal experimentation. Though my reflex is to say, we should not be testing new technologies on animals, it is clear to me that the issue is much more complex. When we look at this matter through a utilitarian view, paired with a desire to ease the most amount of suffering possible, this practice can be seen as a necessity. Though in Buddhism the suffering of a mouse is not seen as less than that as a human, it is clear that the development of a drug that can reduce the suffering of thousands of people is a worthy cause.
When adopting this school of thought, we must take care to properly assess the risks and rewards. When looking at the goal of a medical study, for instance, it would always be easy to justify the means. But as opposed to benefits, which are only a possibility, the suffering on the path to this goal is real and immediate at every stage of development. Though these risks are a necessity for progress, we must not be blinded by ambition and justify our actions based solely on good intentions.
As synthetic biology progresses, it can minimize the suffering of animals in the context of biological research. Researchers can conduct more research in vitro, prolonging the earlier stages of research before moving to animals. I believe that as tissue engineering techniques progress, we will be able to even further prolong these in vitro studies, gaining more insight before experimenting on animals. An additional benefit of this is the risk of animal suffering being in vain is reduced, as we can gather more information before testing the mechanism in vivo.
Another major topic concerning animals is lab-grown meat, which I believe is an area of extreme importance. In addition to the obvious fact that it will help ease the suffering of animals; as the threat to food security grows, technologies like this and other developments such as controlled environment agriculture will become critical to feeding the world’s population. In the same vein, I think that GMO crops are of paramount importance for the future of food security. As opposed to other religions, where there are some roadblocks between the laws in place and genetically engineering plants (see our interview on Judaism for instance), I could find no such rules hindering progress in this field in Buddhism.
The last topic I want to touch on is the intention, an essential theme in Buddhist thought. Many actions can be viewed simultaneously, by different parties, as ethical or unethical. This perception of an action is contingent on so many factors, it is impossible to anticipate. Likewise, we often do not understand the full extent of our actions as they unfold, but rather only in hindsight. As predicting outcomes is so difficult, it is critical that when we take action, our intention is clear, and rooted in the qualities discussed earlier. Though this does not annul us from the responsibility of our actions’ outcomes, it is of paramount importance to keep in mind as we navigate moral decisions. This applies to all aspects of life but is of special importance in the realm of biological research which has such significant effects on society. Is the intention of drug development to help the sick, or personal gain? Are GMOs being created to feed the world, or enrich a small group of corporate executives? The questions of intention also lay at the center of debates on genetic engineering in humans.
As the next generation of biologists begins to shape the future it is critical that we keep these questions in mind. I believe, as is true with Buddhism, the guiding principle for synthetic biological research should to reduce the amount of suffering experienced by all living creatures.
Ethics in the dharma can often be very general and at the same time situational. There is a foundation of blanket qualities Buddhists strive to cultivate such as empathy, equanimity, and kindness to all living creatures. These can be translated into a moral compass leading to decisions that guided by a continuous effort to ease the suffering of all sentient beings.
Though these guidelines seem clear, more often than not, particular courses of action are not offered for a specific situation. In contrast to other religions, Buddhism did not create an encompassing set of rules for all practitioners. Though the monks have a very strict code of conduct set out, a far-reaching system of rules was not made for lay practitioners. I believe this exists in other religions, as an attempt to sculpt an entire social system, a goal which was not a priority for the Buddha when he began his teachings. As such, even though ethical guidelines are clearly laid out, there is room for interpretation and the development of Buddhist ethics, allowing them to evolve and remain relevant in changing times.
Through this lens, I began to dive into the ethical questions that are associated with biological research. As the first precept in Buddhism is to abstain from killing, or even harming all living beings, a central question that arises, is on the topic of animal experimentation. Though my reflex is to say, we should not be testing new technologies on animals, it is clear to me that the issue is much more complex. When we look at this matter through a utilitarian view, paired with a desire to ease the most amount of suffering possible, this practice can be seen as a necessity. Though in Buddhism the suffering of a mouse is not seen as less than that as a human, it is clear that the development of a drug that can reduce the suffering of thousands of people is a worthy cause.
When adopting this school of thought, we must take care to properly assess the risks and rewards. When looking at the goal of a medical study, for instance, it would always be easy to justify the means. But as opposed to benefits, which are only a possibility, the suffering on the path to this goal is real and immediate at every stage of development. Though these risks are a necessity for progress, we must not be blinded by ambition and justify our actions based solely on good intentions.
As synthetic biology progresses, it can minimize the suffering of animals in the context of biological research. Researchers can conduct more research in vitro, prolonging the earlier stages of research before moving to animals. I believe that as tissue engineering techniques progress, we will be able to even further prolong these in vitro studies, gaining more insight before experimenting on animals. An additional benefit of this is the risk of animal suffering being in vain is reduced, as we can gather more information before testing the mechanism in vivo.
Another major topic concerning animals is lab-grown meat, which I believe is an area of extreme importance. In addition to the obvious fact that it will help ease the suffering of animals; as the threat to food security grows, technologies like this and other developments such as controlled environment agriculture will become critical to feeding the world’s population. In the same vein, I think that GMO crops are of paramount importance for the future of food security. As opposed to other religions, where there are some roadblocks between the laws in place and genetically engineering plants (see our interview on Judaism for instance), I could find no such rules hindering progress in this field in Buddhism.
The last topic I want to touch on is the intention, an essential theme in Buddhist thought. Many actions can be viewed simultaneously, by different parties, as ethical or unethical. This perception of an action is contingent on so many factors, it is impossible to anticipate. Likewise, we often do not understand the full extent of our actions as they unfold, but rather only in hindsight. As predicting outcomes is so difficult, it is critical that when we take action, our intention is clear, and rooted in the qualities discussed earlier. Though this does not annul us from the responsibility of our actions’ outcomes, it is of paramount importance to keep in mind as we navigate moral decisions. This applies to all aspects of life but is of special importance in the realm of biological research which has such significant effects on society. Is the intention of drug development to help the sick, or personal gain? Are GMOs being created to feed the world, or enrich a small group of corporate executives? The questions of intention also lay at the center of debates on genetic engineering in humans.
As the next generation of biologists begins to shape the future it is critical that we keep these questions in mind. I believe, as is true with Buddhism, the guiding principle for synthetic biological research should to reduce the amount of suffering experienced by all living creatures.
Atheism
Regulation and technological progress - Dr. Yair Rezek
Dr. Yair Rezek holds a Ph.D. in Physics and is an active member in the Israeli atheist association called "Hofesh". He is also a representative of an Israeli political party named "Or" which advocates for principles of humanism, freedom, and equality.
How does the Atheist movement view genetic engineering, or GMO's, in general?
The majority of Atheists see themselves as part of a type of enlightenment movement and the scientific revolution, perhaps. These movements are in favor of any type of technological development (and genetic engineering in particular) that will benefit humanity. That said, like many other technologies, genetic engineering has the potential to give rise to harmful results and should be developed carefully.
Don't you think that many types of technological advancements can potentially lead humanity to catastrophe in the long run?
It's tempting to see scientific development in that way, but I think it is too pessimistic. For example, regarding the creation and use of atomic bombs… The developed world on whole has stopped developing bombs with that capacity. I'd say, today, humanity actually represses technology because of our past mistakes, like in the context of nuclear energy. I think genetically engineered organisms may potentially cause damage, both inherently and due to its high costs (which promote the formation of monopolies, for example). But still, I think that the benefits we can attain with this type of technology are plentiful. I further believe that if we, the responsible scientists of the world, decide to stop developing these technologies, someone else will do it in a way that might be less careful, or less well-intentioned. That's why our society should still engage with this type of development in a careful, and well-regulated manner.
What potential downsides do you see as a byproduct of the development of genetic engineering?
The use of a singular crop, regardless if it is GMO or not, can be devastating when it is found to be sensitive to a certain disease or specific pests; therefore, the development and use of lone strains of GMOs could hurt biodiversity in food crops and create such problems. Also, since it is very expensive to properly develop, it can foster the rise of [more] giant monopolies in the food industry, which I am opposed to.
Do you support the use of genetic engineering for the production of food and medicine and for solving environmental issues?
Yes. However, in each of the fields that you mentioned, there are different safety guidelines that should govern us through the development of new applications for each technology. For example, in agriculture, we should pay attention to the fact that any one solution could cause certain ecological issues, such as the [unintended and] uncontrolled invasion of genetically engineered plants in their new environment. We should test these kinds of solutions with great scrutiny and take into account the unwanted consequences of these proposed solutions before making widespread use of them. As for medicine, there are well-documented regulations concerning the approval of treatments, including gene therapy. It becomes more complex when considering the idea of trans-humanism. Beyond medicine, genetic improvements of human capabilities could lead to significant social stratification and general ethical complications.
How do you think our society should regulate the development of these technologies?
I believe it is imperative to thoroughly teach those who are engaged in subjects such as synthetic biology courses in ethics, ecology, etc. in order to equip them as experts to handle both the technological and societal aspects of their fields. These experts can then more responsibly consider the outcomes of their research and offer more well-adapted responses when addressing the public. To further proper regulation, we must also have experts that can (and will) shed light on public misconceptions in terms that the public can understand. When creating regulations, we should seek a balance between the effectiveness [of the regulation] and the development [of the technology] so we don't entirely hinder progress in the field. A regulation that is too strict would cause the development to be done elsewhere, while regulation that is too lax will be ineffective as far as preventing harm.
The majority of Atheists see themselves as part of a type of enlightenment movement and the scientific revolution, perhaps. These movements are in favor of any type of technological development (and genetic engineering in particular) that will benefit humanity. That said, like many other technologies, genetic engineering has the potential to give rise to harmful results and should be developed carefully.
Don't you think that many types of technological advancements can potentially lead humanity to catastrophe in the long run?
It's tempting to see scientific development in that way, but I think it is too pessimistic. For example, regarding the creation and use of atomic bombs… The developed world on whole has stopped developing bombs with that capacity. I'd say, today, humanity actually represses technology because of our past mistakes, like in the context of nuclear energy. I think genetically engineered organisms may potentially cause damage, both inherently and due to its high costs (which promote the formation of monopolies, for example). But still, I think that the benefits we can attain with this type of technology are plentiful. I further believe that if we, the responsible scientists of the world, decide to stop developing these technologies, someone else will do it in a way that might be less careful, or less well-intentioned. That's why our society should still engage with this type of development in a careful, and well-regulated manner.
What potential downsides do you see as a byproduct of the development of genetic engineering?
The use of a singular crop, regardless if it is GMO or not, can be devastating when it is found to be sensitive to a certain disease or specific pests; therefore, the development and use of lone strains of GMOs could hurt biodiversity in food crops and create such problems. Also, since it is very expensive to properly develop, it can foster the rise of [more] giant monopolies in the food industry, which I am opposed to.
Do you support the use of genetic engineering for the production of food and medicine and for solving environmental issues?
Yes. However, in each of the fields that you mentioned, there are different safety guidelines that should govern us through the development of new applications for each technology. For example, in agriculture, we should pay attention to the fact that any one solution could cause certain ecological issues, such as the [unintended and] uncontrolled invasion of genetically engineered plants in their new environment. We should test these kinds of solutions with great scrutiny and take into account the unwanted consequences of these proposed solutions before making widespread use of them. As for medicine, there are well-documented regulations concerning the approval of treatments, including gene therapy. It becomes more complex when considering the idea of trans-humanism. Beyond medicine, genetic improvements of human capabilities could lead to significant social stratification and general ethical complications.
How do you think our society should regulate the development of these technologies?
I believe it is imperative to thoroughly teach those who are engaged in subjects such as synthetic biology courses in ethics, ecology, etc. in order to equip them as experts to handle both the technological and societal aspects of their fields. These experts can then more responsibly consider the outcomes of their research and offer more well-adapted responses when addressing the public. To further proper regulation, we must also have experts that can (and will) shed light on public misconceptions in terms that the public can understand. When creating regulations, we should seek a balance between the effectiveness [of the regulation] and the development [of the technology] so we don't entirely hinder progress in the field. A regulation that is too strict would cause the development to be done elsewhere, while regulation that is too lax will be ineffective as far as preventing harm.