WHAT WILL HUMANS LOOK LIKE IN 100 YEARS

WHAT WILL HUMANS LOOK LIKE IN 100 YEARS? BY MATEO, OWEN, KEVIN

DEFINE QUESTION: To what degree is it ethical to artificially evolve the human race? And who should regulate this? Some of our biggest questions and problems came from prosthetics. Questions like how will they be manufactured how "advanced" are they, is it worth it to buy one and is it ethical for someone to modify their body to that degree. Scientists say these prosthetics can make you jump higher, run faster etc. But things like religion and concern take a big role in how many people will use them. The concerns being things like is it worth the risk? Is it worth the price tag? Some prosthetics costing $11, 000 USD. Concerns about religion could be is this ethical as a human to do this to our selves and maybe becoming something we're not. The final problem to this was government.

DISCOVER What has already been answered? Well, not much has been researched into this topic, but a Chinese scientist did raise a lot of controversy when he claimed the spot to become the first to genetically modify a human embryo. Mr. Huang did not think there would be such backlash from the scientists across the table from him as a reaction to this breakthrough, but it does show us that even such a seemingly minute (at least now) change caused such a huge tidal wave of ethical debates. So this brings me to the conclusion that, precisely for the reason of ethical controversy, not many studies have actually been conducted with genetic engineering and prosthetically enhancing the human body.

DREAM • Since our project focuses a lot on prosthetics, I really think the dream should be advancing prosthetics to a more advanced level so that they can be used in multiple different ways. These prosthetics could function in ways that maybe even a human foot couldn't compete with, but with that comes the consequences of people WANTING prosthetics instead of NEEDING prosthetics • There is also that dream where society and the people around us would adjust to evolving humans so that we change our views on the topic. The main problem of our topic is, is it ethical to evolve human beings and the issues with that start with ourselves because 100 years ago we didn't go to the gym, we didn’t "diet" but as we evolved these things started occurring, you cant really make a call on the future. Im sure 100 years ago they didn’t expect us to be having rose tattoos and care so much about our physical appearance but that's just how we have come to be in the last 100 years and in 100 years who really knows the possibilities they are endless.

DELIVER • We discovered a lot about detailed prosthetics and how people are wanting prosthetic over needing them and we found out a lot about the consequences of this, for example since there must be limited number of prosthetics and people who don't need them are taking them from people who really do need them. We found out a lot about nerves and how we could even dodge a bullet if we could see the mussel flash. • We learned about the past and how much has changed in the way we do things now and how we could change a whole lot more in the next 100 years. Its really interesting to see how much we have changed over a century and how it could change in another century. We have discovered that we think people should not have there choice on whether to evolve or not because it is very dangerous for a lot of people, because we don’t know who will be making these decisions because they are very important decisions to make.

DEBRIEF So what have you learned from this? Well, to put it in simpler perspectives, you can break it down a bit. Now is the first time in the history of our world that mankind has been able to enhance our bodies to this extent. So, we beg the question that must be asked; to what degree is it ethical to do so? And who should be able to control this? We explored the endless possibilities that prosthetics and neuro-engineering could bring us and the question that seems to have been lurking about for ages now. Is the induced evolution of mankind necessary for the survival of the human race? There have been numerous cases of animals and plants going extinct; no because they couldn't adapt, but because they couldn't evolve quick enough. Dinosaurs were wiped out because of it. Humans could escape that fate, but the question really is a moral one. Could we stand by and watch our next generations die, knowing we could've prevented the extinction? Or should we leave the planet and find another host to the human race? These questions have been more or less answered with implications throughout, but we can agree that there is never a consensus within the entire global population; especially not on these sorts of matters.