Survival of the fittest?

Reference: http://www.oyewiki.com/tech/survival-of-the-fittest-23-5-2017

Science is an amazing, wonderful undertaking: it teaches us about life, the world, and the Universe. But it has not revealed to us why the universe came into existence, nor what preceded its birth in the Big Bang. Equally, biological evolution has not brought us the slightest understanding of how the first living organisms emerged from inanimate matter on this planet, and how the advanced eukaryotic cells—the highly structured building blocks of advanced life forms—ever emerged from simpler organisms. Neither does it explain one of the greatest mysteries of science: how did consciousness arise in living things? Where do symbolic thinking and self-awareness come from? What is it that allows us humans to understand the mysteries of biology, physics, mathematics, engineering, and medicine? And what enables us to create great works of art, music, architecture, and literature? Science is nowhere near to explaining these deep mysteries.

It's when you are lost amidst your thoughts, you occasionally ponder of your existence. When in agony(mental or physical) you wonder that where you born in this world only to undergo such misery? What is my purpose here? Why is life existent on earth? Why is everything the way it is? Out of all this,through my article, I try to discuss the possibilities that will exist in future and appease myself to the above questions gradually by considering the theories in existence by scientists.This topic interested me, though I am not a big biology lover and there are no particular answers for either. The title juxtaposes with everyone's endurance in the competitive world and how each day we have to undergo much to survive.

A new concept bought about by the leading scientists and biologist suggest a new technique to induce the traits we want in ourselves medically. With this emerging concept, the scenario of evolution will completely have a new meaning and how will the species fight to survive when each of them have their own traits. Will it really be the survival of fittest or will it turn out to be the battleground of different economies?

“Indeed, the only truly serious questions are ones that even a child can formulate. Only the most naive of questions are truly serious. They are the questions with no answers. A question with no answer is a barrier that cannot be breached. In other words, it is questions with no answers that set the limit of human possibilities, describe the boundaries of human existence.”

― Milan Kundera, The Unbearable Lightness of Being.

Leaving alone the darkest questions which come under powerful spheres of cosmology, psychology, philosophy, theology, religion, metaphysics, biology, anthropology, genomics, economics, sociology, spiritual studies etc. which have no specific answers and is considered a wild goose chase of varied perceptions and interests of diverse groups. Natural selection is Darwin’s most famous theory; it states that evolutionary change comes through the production of variation in each generation and differential survival of individuals with different combinations of these variable characters. Individuals with characteristics which increase their probability of survival will have more opportunities to reproduce and their offspring will also benefit from the heritable, advantageous character. So over time these variants will spread through the population. Highly energetic chemistry is thought to have produced a self-replicating molecule around 4 billion years ago, and half a billion years later the last common ancestor of all life existed. The current scientific consensus is that the complex biochemistry that makes up life came from simpler chemical reactions. The beginning of life may have included self-replicating molecules such as RNA and the assembly of simple cells.

Medical ethicist Harvey Fineberg shows us three paths forward for the ever-evolving human species: to stop evolving completely, to evolve naturally — or to control the next steps of human evolution, using genetic modification, to make ourselves smarter, faster, better. Neo-evolution is within our grasp. What will we do with it?

Genetic engineering, also called genetic modification, is the direct manipulation of an organism's genome using biotechnology. New DNA may be inserted in the host genome by first isolating and copying the genetic material of interest using molecular cloning methods to generate a DNA sequence, or by synthesizing the DNA, and then inserting this construct into the host organism. Genes may be removed, or "knocked out", using a nuclease. Gene targeting is a different technique that uses homologous recombination to change an endogenous gene, and can be used to delete a gene, remove exons, add a gene, or introduce point mutations.

Critics have objected to use of genetic engineering per se on several grounds, including ethical concerns, ecological concerns, and economic concerns raised by the fact GM techniques and GM organisms are subject to intellectual property law. GMOs also are involved in controversies over GM food with respect to whether food produced from GM crops is safe, whether it should be labeled, and whether GM crops are needed to address the world's food needs. These controversies have led to litigation, international trade disputes, and protests, and to restrictive regulation of commercial products in most countries.

At TED 2009, what made Enriquez' presentation so engaging was that his vision wasn't that far off, this sci-fi future that he spoke of; it's the future that is unveiling itself right before us, a future that we will all likely watch arrive, and our children will come to know as reality. Chairman and CEO of Biotechonomy, Juan Enriquez says that humanity is on the verge of becoming a new and utterly unique species, which he dubs Homo Evolutis. What makes this species so unique is that it "takes direct and deliberate control over the evolution of the species." Calling it the "ultimate reboot," he points to the conflux of DNA manipulation and therapy, tissue generation, and robotics as making this great leap possible.We are already in the midst of minor improvements to the human body and mind; Enriquez gave examples of growing new tissues for successful transplant, programmable cells, and augmenting our abilities through robotics.

As this trend accelerates, more and more aspects of the human experience, of the human life, will be capable of scientific manipulation. While some improvement may come post-birth, our understanding of DNA and biology may lead to something much bigger.

The day may come when we are able to take the best biology of the known animal kingdom and make it part of our own. This isn't just about being a bit stronger, or having perfect eyesight our whole lives. All of our organs and limbs have weaknesses that can be addressed, and there are also opportunities to go beyond basic fixes and perform more elaborate enhancements. At a private lunch on Thursday, Enriquez spoke of a young girl who, after suffering a knee injury, received tendon replacement therapy centered around tendons grown in a lab. It not only fixed her knee, but made it stronger than normal. Later in life as she pursued life as a professional skier, the coach actually asked that she have the same surgery on her other knee to increase her abilities.

The point was clear: one day it will be possible for everyone to have stronger joints, bones, etc., thanks to work being done today, work which may ultimately be delivered into DNA. We would become a species that could, literally, control its own biological destiny. Like many, Enriquez believes that our workforce is going to work later and later in life, to the age of 70 and beyond. This is necessary because we need more production, and also because we must reduce the amount of time seniors spend collecting money from governments. In this way, the dawn of Homo Evolutis will not merely be occasioned by our desire to live longer, but by the necessity of it.

Are we at some kind of evolutionary equipoise as a species? Or, are we destined to become something different — something, perhaps, even better adapted to the environment?How would you like to be better than you are? Suppose I said that, with just a few changes in your genes, you could get a better memory — more precise, more accurate and quicker.

-Harvey Fineberg

some of the reactions of readers which are worth reading are:

I’m more interested in another directed-human-evolution experiment: provide all women with complete control (contraception, abortion, etc) over their fertility so that they only give birth to the offspring of males they consider worthy of reproduction, and see what happens after a few hundred generations.
It is inevitable that genetic engineering will move forward despite the efforts of ethicists, moralists and theologians to restrain it. It is equally inevitable that some part of the human race will willingly opt for genetic modifications, artificial augmentation, and chemical enhancements for themselves and their offspring.

The question is not will it happen, but will it become the new “normal”.

The answer depends on how much of an edge going neo can provide.

If you have the choice between giving your child the brain of Einstein and the athletic grace of Michael Jordan or take a chance that he/she will come out like the love child of Larry the Cable guy and Sally Kern, what would you choose

Neo-evolution will only result in the super-rich evolving for immortality, even if that involves a diet only of Soy lent Green

Ref:

Harvey Fineberg-Are we ready for neo-evolution?-ted talk
Juan Enriquez- The life-code that will reshape the future-ted talk
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13671-evolution-myths-survival-of-the-fittest-justifies-everyone-for-themselves.