Will advances in intelligent design lead to polarization and inequality, and is equitable distribution possible in a capitalist system?

In Yuval Harari’s end-of-the-world scenario, intelligently designed technology could lead to a new evolution of humanity and extreme social inequality. It is worth discussing whether this technology can be equitably distributed within a capitalist system.

 

Yuval Harari, the author of Homo sapiens, described three scenarios in which humanity could be replaced by another species in the future. His main argument is that all of these scenarios are the result of scientific and technological advances, and that humans become intelligent beings and design new life forms, much like the religious theory of intelligent design. However, just as medical care varies according to wealth, technological advances due to intelligent design would not be equally available to everyone in the current economic system. Therefore, I would like to discuss whether such intelligently designed technologies can be traded for money in the current capitalist system.
The intelligent design discussed in this book is distinctly different from the intelligent design theory advocated by the religious community. Intelligent design is the theory that an intelligent being, such as God, intentionally designed life, including humans. However, intelligent design is an argument that presupposes a transcendent intelligent being whose existence or non-existence cannot be proven, so it is not a scientific argument about how phenomena work, but rather an appeal to ignorance. Although it is illogical, the scientific community’s theory of Darwinian evolution explains the origin of humanity.
While the author considers the religious theory of intelligent design to be absurd, he paradoxically sees it as the cause of the end of the human race. The idea is that humans will become intelligent designers and replace natural selection. We are currently in the process of transforming into a new species through biotechnology, cyborg engineering, and non-organic engineering, and people expect intelligent design to lead to breakthroughs in medicine. The possibilities for intelligent design are endless, from manipulating genes to cure incurable diseases to making artificial organs more widely available to overcome disabilities. And ultimately, it could bring us one step closer to the Gilgamesh Project for eternal life.
However, if these technologies can be traded for money, at some point there will be a serious polarization, and we need to debate whether intelligent design technologies should be traded for money. I will argue in favor of the idea that the benefits of intelligent design should be equally available to all people, regardless of wealth. I will explain this in three ways: the potential for superhuman domination, inequality, and abuse.
First, to prevent the superhumans that would emerge from intelligent design from dominating society, the benefits of intelligent design should be distributed equally. Currently, intelligent design is mainly used for genetic manipulation in animals, and to a limited extent in humans to overcome disabilities. However, intelligent design ultimately aims to create genetically and physically perfect humans. Therefore, in the future, the people created by intelligent design will be superior to the current human race, a new species. And no one knows if there will be a future where these superhumans rule the world.
The process of superhuman domination could be similar to the trickle-down phenomenon. Just as wealthy people become wealthier through investment, intelligent design will allow wealthier people to strive to get closer to superhumanity, and in turn invest in becoming a more superior human species through the achievements of superior physical and mental capabilities. Of course, greater physical and mental capabilities do not always translate into greater achievement, but as the human species becomes more polarized, the differences in performance will become more pronounced. Eventually, just as the rich dominate the global economy, superhumans could increasingly be the ones behind the world’s dominance.
The second problem is the inequality that intelligent design creates. The information revolution of the mid-20th century made it possible to communicate with people around the world via the internet, but only 54% of the world’s population still has access to the internet. This means that the rate at which technology is being adopted has not kept up with the rate of progress. The problem is that the same cannot be said for the benefits of intelligent design. In terms of survival, not having access to the internet isn’t that big of a deal, but the imbalance of intelligent design is problematic because it makes the difference between the more advanced species and the less advanced.
This is the kind of racial superiority that the Nazis touted during World War II to exterminate the Jews. The gap between developed and underdeveloped nations will grow wider, with the economically wealthy becoming a better species than others, and furthermore, having more access to technological gains. These species differences will form insurmountable barriers. Genetic differences are innate, like women being better at singing high notes than men, so there is a limit to how much effort we can put into overcoming them. And this, in turn, will lead to differences in the opportunities available to individuals. This would mean abandoning the equality of human beings that has been achieved through numerous revolutions and returning to a class society determined by birth. Not only that, but humans will be discriminated against by their genes and will be in constant competition to become more genetically perfect. In the end, intelligent design will regress society, contrary to its intentions.
Finally, intelligent design can be abused and exploited by capitalism. Think back to dynamite and the Manhattan Project. Nobel famously invented dynamite to create a safe gunpowder that could be used in mines, but was saddened to see it used in warfare. Also, the Manhattan Project, which led to tremendous advances in nuclear physics, such as nuclear power generation, but also led to the development of a deadly weapon in the form of the atomic bomb. From these experiences, we know that science and technology are not always positive.
The same is true for intelligent design. We look forward to more advanced genetic engineering to cure incurable diseases, overcome disabilities, and more. But the danger of intelligent design is no less than that of dynamite or a nuclear bomb. Just as a nuclear bomb can wipe out the human race in the blink of an eye, genetic engineering can massively clone humans, treating them as expendable, or manipulate their genes to control their birth. Under capitalism, if some people take advantage of their economic wealth to abuse and misuse it, they could organize armies of cloned humans to wage war or forcibly manipulate the genes of those who disobey them. To prevent this from happening, it would be necessary to prohibit monopolization of intelligent design technology and to make its use public so that people can check each other’s misuse.
The intelligent design of humans stands on the shoulders of the “Gilgamesh Project,” which, as the author notes, is the pursuit of eternal life. This means that the quest for intelligent design continues in the name of healing the sick and advancing medicine. However, when intelligent design, like genetic engineering, is monopolized or monopolized by capital, a variety of problems will arise, and the dangers are perhaps the greatest in human history. Just as we banned nuclear testing only after the atomic bomb was dropped because we realized the severity of the consequences, we should learn from the past and develop socially agreed-upon regulations that equally distribute the benefits of technology before problems arise.