No one may have the guts to say this, but if we could make better human beings by knowing how to add genes, why shouldn't we?
If we could honestly promise young couples that we knew how to give them offspring with superior character, why should we assume they would decline? Common sense tells us that if scientists find ways to greatly improve human capabilities, there will no stopping the public from happily seizing them.
Interpretation
What this quote means
The quote suggests that people would embrace scientific advancements to enhance human traits if promised superior outcomes.
James D. Watson's quote emphasizes the inherent human desire for improvement and progress. It posits that if it were possible to guarantee better character traits and capabilities for future generations through scientific means, couples would likely accept such advancements without hesitation. This reflects a broader discussion about the ethical implications and public acceptance of genetic engineering and enhancement technologies.
Themes
In practice
Example use cases
During a lecture on genetic engineering, this quote can be used to illustrate public interest in scientific advancements.
More from James D. Watson
All quotes →I think the reason people are dealing with science less well now than 50 years ago is that it has become so complicated.
Polls consistently show that the majority of Americans favour research using embryonic stem cells and yet politicians continue to pander to the outspoken religious minority that is hampering efforts to develop this potentially valuable technology.
DNA was my only gold rush. I regarded DNA as worth a gold rush.
Science has always been my preoccupation and when you think a breakthrough is possible, it is terribly exciting.
If you go into science, I think you better go in with a dream that maybe you, too, will get a Nobel Prize. It's not that I went in and I thought I was very bright and I was going to get one, but I'll confess, you know, I knew what it was.
Similar quotes
My practise as a scientist is atheistic. That is to say, when I set up an experiment I assume that no god, angel, or devil is going to interfere with its course; and this assumption has been justified by such success as I have achieved in my professional career. I should therefore be intellectually dishonest if I were not also atheistic in the affairs of the world. And I should be a coward if I did not state my theoretical views in public.
Cancer was not disorganized chromosomal chaos. It was organized chromosomal chaos
I'm a scientist, not a theologian. I don't know if there is a God or not. Religion requires certainty. Revere and respect Gaia. Have trust in Gaia. But not faith.
Mathematics is the tool specially suited for dealing with abstract concepts of any kind and there is no limit to its power in this field.
A scientist is as weak and human as any man, but the pursuit of science may ennoble him even against his will.
Matter, though divisible in an extreme degree, is nevertheless not infinitely divisible. That is, there must be some point beyond which we cannot go in the division of matter. ... I have chosen the word “atom” to signify these ultimate particles.