What do you think of the concept of artificial wombs?
From: Artificial Womb (Uterus)
Safer, Healthier, Cheaper & More Liberating - The Artificial Uterus.
Artificial Wombs, self-contained synthetic structures that replicate the
best of a real woman's uterus, will surely soon be available in the
mass market, as technology progresses in its relentlessly life-improving
The demand for such a thing is clearly, tentatively, huge.
Offering a safer, healthier, more affordable and liberating way of
having a child, only those most conservative, traditional, or
desperately poor will choose the conventional organic method.
Scientists are already working on artificial womb projects and finding some niggling difficulties in doing so.
for clarifying my listed benefits of such a technology, an artificial
womb would present a safer option, as it would be of a mechanical design
in common with life-support systems that are most probably less
susceptible to failure than human bodies, including healthy mothers.
Further more, these devices would be static, as opposed to climbing
stairs, walking streets and driving cars.
artificial womb would be a healthier womb. This holds for the same
reasons technology is employed in the production of the vegetables and
fruits we eat. Hydroponics set-ups administer carefully, optimally
controlled doses of nutrient to plants roots, while allowing for maximum
air flow, and minimal disturbance from soil-based pests. I do not mean
to suggest an infant child and a tomato plant are one and the same, but
there are in fact parallels to be drawn.
As for more affordable,
please do the following maths; Pregnant women experience a significantly
reduced capacity to work. Women expecting children the artificial way
will have the flexibility to work for longer, if they wish. And so they
will be more liberated, able to walk, fly and live more comfortably,
also free of any possible concern that they might not recognise their
own bodies, during and after pregnancy.
As someone who grew up with "Brave New World" as a horrific vision of a
future dystopian order, the idea of growing children in test tubes
brings out the inner Luddite in me. I have the same reaction when I
hear people talk about having their personalities transferred to
computer chips so they can live forever.
I simply do not believe that a computer chip can actually be the same
experience as having a human body. Nor can I believe that humans - who
manage to screw up the simplest things - are anywhere close to being
able to duplicate every last tiny biological process which it takes to
gestate an embryo into a fully developed human being. Each day what
seems to me to be a very profound difference between existing and living,
seems to grow ever wider. Modern life is as shallow as coat of paint. I think the roots of the universal psychosis we
observe in the modern world stem from a loss of understanding why we do,
and feel the urge to do, what we do.
For example - obesity. For most of human history there have seldom been
the problems of excess calories or too little exercise required to stay
alive. People were far more likely to starve to death due to lack of
sufficient calories than to bloat up like so many people do today.
People feel the desire - the need, the hunger - to eat, because if they
didn't the body would perish. Likewise, people feel the desire - the
need, the hunger - to engage in sex because if they didn't the human
race would perish.
In the past, people ate because they were hungry. If they weren't
hungry, they didn't eat, or at least eat much. They did not eat as a
pass time. And, they usually stopped eating when they were full - when
the hunger was satisfied. But with the advent of modern junk food, the
eating becomes the purpose - not the satiation of hunger.
I think much the same thing is true with sex. Before artificial birth
control, pregnancy and children were as tied up with the act of sex as
bowel movements are with eating. The costs of rearing children, and the
burdens of spending one's life with a person, made people think about
the choices a lot more, and apply the collective wisdom of the culture
and their families to the decision.
If a man wanted children, he had to find a decent woman to make his
wife, and then treat her decently. If a woman wanted children, and
needed a man to provide for her and the kids, physically, she would
assess a man on other criteria than her 'gina tingles.
Artificial birth control threw all that out of the window. Sure, women
could indulge their 'gina tingles, and men could indulge their dick
tingles, without paying the historic price, but in the process sex was
turned into junk food, and created a culture which is characterized by
either sexual obesity (Alphas) or sexual starvation (everyone else.)
There is probably no way to get the toothpaste back in the tube, but
that does not mean it is time to lay the tube on an anvil and beat it
with a sledgehammer to squeeze the last tiny bit out.
I don't get very concerned about artificial womb technology because, as I
mentioned above, I seriously doubt that humans will ever be able to
pull it off. Much of the rhetoric I hear about it is motivated by
spite. I once read a post by a guy saying "men need reproductive
independence from women." So... now we are going to tear the human race
completely in half? Haven't feminists already done enough damage? Do
men need to import napalm so they can re-scorch the well-scorched earth?
But, if it were possible, I think it would have a devastating effect on
culture, beside which artificial birth control would pale. The idea of
manufacturing children in factories - as the ultimate consumer commodity
- is quite repugnant to me. I think this would devalue human life even
further, and put children in the same category as a new car. "Hey, if I
don't like it after 3 years, I can always buy another one."
Even if I could buy a test-tube baby, I would not. I think that putting
up with the other parent is part of the inherent biological cost of
Junk food, junk-food sex, and then junk-food babies?
Mmmmmm, none for me, thanks.