Playing God (ethics)
Acts described as playing God may include, for example, deciding who should live or die in a situation where not everyone can be saved, the use and development of biotechnologies such as synthetic biology,[1] and in vitro fertilisation.
The religious framework of approach to this phrase refers to said religion's deity having a set plan for mankind, therefore man's hubris may lead to the misuse of technology related to sacred life or nature.
The notion of god-like knowledge or power in humans goes back at least to the story of forbidden fruit in Genesis 3:4–5 whose traditional English translation includes the words "ye shall be as gods".
Other projects scientists have attempted include cloning (Dolly the sheep), even bringing back other extinct species that were previously thought to have been lost to time and could possibly be reintroduced to the wild.
[6] Rabbis continued to use Hartsoeker's image centuries later attempting to prove that artificial interference with an embryo or birth was murder, destruction of life.
[9] This includes genetic diseases that can lead to early death, long-term mental issues, or a lifetime of debilitating physical health problems.
Climate and weather is also a factor that scientists have been looking into that humans could control, with terraforming and cities around the world that are made from scratch and planned out including their geography.
[11] It involves large-scale manipulation of our Earth's natural elements such as the seas, skies, or even atmosphere to counteract against certain environmental issues such as climate change.
The debate among scholars is an ongoing battle, where they seek to bring awareness to critical issues and answer questions that relate to the different morality positions when dealing with the manipulation of earth's elements.
More extreme practices of climate engineering include stimulating phytoplankton blooms in the ocean by seeding iron to absorb excessive carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, to spraying aerosols in the skies to give clouds the maximum reflectivity and brighten them.
[10] Due to the lack of understanding from humans regarding the consequences of putting different chemicals into the atmosphere or seeding oceans, opponents of geo-engineering suggest it be abandoned (Hartman, 2017).
[10] Scientists also argue that geo-engineering in some instances can be cheaper and quite financially feasible; however, the opposition to this is that it is a mere quick fix that moves attention away from the development of long-term solutions.
Major organisations around the world, including the United Nations, have commented on the relationship between artificial intelligence and the impact it may have on human lives in a negative way.
He claims that it was adopted as a rhetorical weapon by bioethicist "theocons", and owes its origin as a meme to the 1931 film version of Frankenstein, and has been used by journalists to refer to things they disagree with.
