There are many “how-to” articles on the internet. Many of them are intuitive ones that answer questions. Some examples are “how to make spaghetti” and “how to grow a fruit tree“.
There are also many that deal with people-to-people interactions, like “how to make friends” or “how to get the man of your dreams” or “how to be persuasive”, and these indirectly say a lot about how people are viewed. If people are as simple to work with as spaghetti, then that says that there is more of a stimulus-response effect going on than is normally assumed.
A Step Towards Reverse Engineering Life
Very recently, the first synthetic life form was created by Craig Venter and his team, and it was a defining moment in scientific efforts. This had not been done before. This says a lot about humanity and what people represent as living organisms. The way that Dr. Venter speaks about the organism he created is like he is talking about a created computer program. He talks about it booting up to life and being able to reproduce. This is a signal that can be taken as a message about our own functioning.
As Dr. Venter and his scientific group work on finding out the smallest amount of necessary genes and elements for creating a reproducing organism, the perspectives of many folks will change. Many folks are not interested in hearing that their growth and actions are so based off of their own programming. It is not appealing to hear that so much of our presence is based on stimulus and response patterns related to our genes.
With the research continuing, teams of scientists will slowly be able to create reproducing life of many types, figuring out what genes are necessary for living, and which ones can be added as enhancements, and what we can alter in our own code in the future.
Information Was Placed Into The Code Like In A Program
Dr. Venter and his team also made sure to put in some code into the genetic code of the synthetically created organism they made, including some names and quotes. The fact that information can be coded into the genetic code shows how far research has come. This is a big step toward the future where organisms are designed to create compounds which we are able to use, or that produce fuel, or that consume some form of waste, or that consume excess carbon dioxide, or so on.
This Is A Step Towards More
This will also later translate into perfecting the types of organisms we already have, because potential for certain diseases or afflictions will be removed, and then things that are nuisances will be removed, and this process will continue as each genetic code gets more and more enhanced. It is somewhat of a form of sped-up evolution.
There are a lot of advertising methods that prey on those who don’t see themselves as being people that mainly follow stimulus-response mechanisms. When you feel like you are very intelligent, which most do, it is hard to believe that you can be hit by certain triggers that cause you to buy things without thinking much.
This type of discovery means so much because a new age is beginning. Just as we have had computers and programs and software and viruses, this is the introduction to the age of cellular programs and software and viruses. While it will take time to get to the point where ‘cool’ cellular entities are created, a large step has been taken.
Perspective About Life Can Change Often
This information getting out there means quite a bit to me because people will be opened up to a better sense of what life is. Knowledge opens the mind by clearing up any items that we were wrong about. It is easy to be against some viewpoint until it is proven that the viewpoint is correct, and then it looks foolish to be against it. This is what research brings to the table.
The question that is the title of this article is one worth pondering. Again, I would say, no advertiser would even hint at this, because much of advertising tries to give the notion that people have so much life and are at the beach and so on, in order to sell product, when actually every step of the commercial or advertising is engineered to acquire purchases from the customers as though they were robotic.
I may have rambled a bit here but I wanted to get some of my thoughts across.
photo credit: à voir etc…
{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }
Hey Armen, I agree that there are many “how-to” articles out there that tell you how to do something. Some of them sort of view the reader as simple-minded in the way that the articles are written. As for the the article on the first synthetic life form created, I think this is a pretty cool news that scientists are on their way to create life forms such as bacteria that can help out humanity. I wonder what other changes we can see in the next years based off of this discovery. It’s kind of exciting, but we’ll just have to wait and see. I also don’t think the religious people in that article were cool with this new discovery.
Twitter: Armen
May 25, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Hi Hulbert.
There are so many how-to articles. Some sure do treat the reader that way. This is okay in some instances, but at some times, it is almost a joke.
Synthetic life forms will make for a huge paradigm shift. I feel like the research that is coming in this field will make a lot of past assumption look like child’s thinking, but that is the way research always works. I’m interested in it anyway.
That is true about the response to that article.
“It has certainly changed my views of definitions of life and how life works” is a valuable line by Dr. Venter.
Hmmm. Genetic engineering scares me and I do respect all the benefits. But creating synthetic life form….It’s a scary thought. It can make revolutionary improvements to life yes but somehow it just scares me. And for the record, I am not one bit religious. Perhaps just skeptical until more information comes around. Thanks for sharing the update as I would hardly hear about it if it weren’t for you, Armen!
Twitter: Armen
May 25, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Hi Farnoosh.
There sure are concerns associated with this next step in knowledge, and some of the potential is somewhat worrying. That makes sense about being skeptical as well. While there are always examples of research being used for good, there are always a few folks who can’t wait to use it to exploit others. Human nature has some issues that don’t mesh well with nature and living organisms, but maybe that will get worked out later.
Glad to have discussed that news story here.
Farnoosh is all up in the place.
Armen,
!
You have a way of making everything sound so peaceful and wonderful. Have you tried to look for that leadership role you talked about?
Thanks for writing!! Keep me abreast of the news….remember I don’t read much of it…
Farnoosh
Twitter: Armen
May 26, 2010 at 5:17 pm
Farnoosh,
This is what I set out to do for the most part. I could also go the other route, but that is not the case for me at this time.
I have noticed that leadership finds me instead of me finding it, but I appreciate that about the role“
I’m here to give you the news. I’m like Channel 9 News at Internet. I bring it like that. At 10 O’clock we have a story about a discovery, and then I provide commentary about human nature at 10:30. Stay tuned for some commercials about fear and bravery“
Twitter: cheryl_paris
May 25, 2010 at 9:54 am
Hi Armen,
This is great achievement in our modern science and technology. As this requires knowledge of genetics and technology to be able to create it. Knowledge and reading it opens mind. Thanks for sharing the article.
Bye for now,
Cheryl Paris
.-= Cheryl Paris´s last blog ..How to Live Without Regret and Stay Sane =-.
Twitter: Armen
May 25, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Hi Cheryl.
It sure is a big achievement. It might be small to some who are performing similar research and who saw it as a small step forward, but for us who may have not kept up with it, this is a big step in the process, like taking someone’s rook in chess.
I see future synthetic organisms as the next step in programming, beyond computers.
Twitter: bretthimself
May 25, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Hey Armen,
I didn’t even comprehend your post for a long, long time – then it finally hit me. Maybe you’d like to wrap it up at the end?
People view other people as robots – or would like them to appear that way. You put these actions in, and you get these results out – so they say. But people are DIFFERENT. Nobody’s going to do things the same, universally. Words are variable; people visualize different things in their heads when you give them a set of instructions, which will make them act differently when they start.
Very interesting and thought provoking, but I had to think a little too hard to get the main message
.-= Brett´s last blog ..Why Become An Entrepreneur When I Can Get a “Normal” Job? =-.
Twitter: Armen
May 25, 2010 at 3:43 pm
Hi Brett.
Oh. Well, that wasn’t my intended main message but it sure can be one to take.
I wasn’t saying that advertisers were wrong in viewing people that way, but that they do, and that we can upgrade our code by being aware of this.
On that other point, we all run through processes in our minds that are similar.
Good to hear your viewpoints Brett.
People are not people because they are conceived nationally or not. I for example could be genetically engineered and as long as no one (including me) knows, no one cares. Would I be different if anybody knew? No, I would be the same. As long as I and other treat me as a natural person, I am a natural person. No matter if I am genetically engineered or not.
If people hear artificial legs and arms, they automatically think terminator instead of prosthetics. If people hear generic engineering, they automatically think gattaca instead of healing cancer. I personally believe that me and my personality (the important stuff) are made from experiences and not from genes or artificial body parts.
Twitter: Armen
May 31, 2010 at 7:19 am
Hi Markus.
You sure would be the same if your code was engineered vs. naturally occurring. I agree on that note.
On the other hand, population growth dynamics could change a lot if certain organisms were bred that were not common, and so it would be a new chapter in our process as organisms. Microbes that wouldn’t have come about naturally could flourish through creation and release.
You have a valid point about personality being made from experiences, but who is to say that memory or neurons will not be able to become encoded at some point as well. If we are composed of certain elements laid out in a certain fashion, and that can be recreated(later on), it gives us a sense of how we should see ourselves.
Twitter: calmgrowth
May 30, 2010 at 10:50 am
Hey Armen,
You presented interesting thoughts on the future and present.
The man has achieved a lot in the study of genetics, however, I think we will never completely imitate nature. Why? Nature is simply too complex. This complexity is not sustainable by the human beings…
Now, that’s my opinion, I believe that there are a lot of those who disagree with me, but time will tell…
.-= Marko — Calm Growth´s last blog ..The Current State of Personal Development Scene – Part 2 =-.
Twitter: Armen
May 31, 2010 at 7:21 am
Hi Marko.
I think it is cool that you put your opinion out there. I know I always am glad and learn more when I put mine out there. I think research is leading us towards being able to completely imitate nature, but I am glad you pointed out your thoughts.
I wonder if it’s worth to be able to manipulate the nature of certain organisms for our benefit. Man has worked hard to find ways to preserve our species but I don’t know if we know for a fact that the generation of man will perish in this earth, just like the living creatures that once existed on the face of this planet. Science may be a powerful tool of man. But life is too short to decipher the nature of the physical realm.
Twitter: Armen
May 31, 2010 at 7:23 am
Hi Walter.
That sure is a way to look at it. I bet there are quite a few scientists who would say that having a perspective that life is too short to figure a certain thing out goes against their perspective that things can be figured out through trial-and-error.
Cool to hear your viewpoint though.