Future Global Ethical Issues (Excerpt from the State of the Future report)

Issues 2010-2025

• 
  What criteria should be applied to judge if a substance should be classified as a performance enhancing drug?
  

• 
  Should professional athletic performance be submitted to drug control?
  

• 
  The question would seem irrelevant if it weren't so sad, because it makes the futile fight for glory and power we as human beings are stuck in, stand out, without caring what we do or who we hurt to achieve them.
  

• 
  Would the same question not apply to attempts at enhancing our own brains?
  

• 
  This question should be moved to 2005-2010 as these are current issues that need addressing.
  

• 
  Should there be two standards for INTELLECTUAL, athletic, musical, and other forms of competition: one for the un-augmented and another for those whose performance has been enhanced by drugs, bionics, genetic engineering, and/or nanobots?
  

• 
  No. Enhanced competitors are simply cheating. I would advocate terminating all amateur events in which enforcement is necessary to catch enhanced competitors.
  

• 
  Good idea. But the standard for the latter should be much higher than the former.
  

• 
  I do not know.
  

• 
  No, because we would be scrimping the efforts of those athletes under normal conditions.
  

• 
  No, I don’t think so.
  

• 
  No, standards should be the same. Either anabolic drugs are acceptable for all - which would generate inequality - or they are not acceptable for anybody.
  

• 
  Should there be two OR MORE standards.
  

• 
  How can we avoid double standards? Is it ethical to accept information pollution by BIG media corporations?
  

• 
  More than a crime, this is an aberration caused by ignorance and the confusion of those who do it.
  

• 
  What leads us to information pollution? What ends are we after? What are the consequences? From this analysis we should arrive at the definition and the consequences of this way of behaving.
  

• 
  Maybe it shouldn't be considered a crime, but should be considered a possible danger.
  

• 
  Reformulate: explain what you mean by information pollution and use the word offense, rather than crime.
  

• 
  If distributed with intent to defraud or as spam, false information is already a criminal offence.
  

• 
  Information pollution in the sense of disinformation should be amongst the issues 2005-2010
  

• 
  It is a notion that should be included in the codes of conduct and social responsibility of the organizations in charge to make publicity.
  

• 
  Yes - perhaps "crimes against humanity."
  

• 
  Yes, if the information harms the individuals' moral structure, or if it negatively influences the conduct of the individuals.
  

• 
  Yes, I think so.
  

• 
  Sure. Information pollution is more serious than environment pollution.
  

• 
  Yes indeed as it has terrible consequences on the human wellbeing.
  

• 
  Is it ethical for society to refuse to revive extinct species?
  

• 
  Is it ethical for society to reproduce extinct species?
  

• 
  How ethical would be selecting among these distinct species and how can abuses be avoided?
  

• 
  The question is too simplistic in its present form.
  

• 
  The extinction of the species is related to a cycle of survival, nevertheless is necessary to study the impact that has exerted on the extinction from human action.
  

• 
  Comment: the question is not clear.
  

• 
  No, I don't think so.
  

• 
  It's difficult to tell at this moment. In any case, the motives and consequences of this act should be studied and analyzed in depth in order to determine if it is absolutely ethical and benefits humanity.
  

• 
  No, I think nature should follow its course; it could happen that these species were recreated and then it would be difficult to preserve them.
  

• 
  Should there be a concerted effort at social engineering to maximize social harmony, preservation of natural environment and resources, and economic progress?
  

• 
  With a vastly more interconnected world, when ideas, people, and resources can clearly come together to solve a problem or achieve an opportunity, ARE THERE ETHICAL AND UNETHICAL WAYS HOW to connect them, when it is clearly in one's power to do so?
  

• 
  The question is not clear.
  

• 
  "With a vastly more interconnected world..." applies to any technological advancement and in general just has to do with it being ethical to do something to improve anything when you have the power to do it.
  

• 
  Yes. My avocation is such connections.
  

• 
  Definitively the answer is affirmative. Without doubt, not acting would imply a collective irresponsibility, mostly when we are conscientious of the necessity to work and to build a society based on principles, values, and ethical behavior before everything. (
  

• 
  Yes, it is.
  

• 
  Very unethical.
  

• 
  Probably yes. The lack of ethics can occur as much from omission as by mandate. We are responsible for what we do and don't do.
  

• 
  I don't know if this is anti ethical but clearly it would be better to do it.
  

• 
  I suggest separating this in two questions: 1. In this time period it is possible for an individual to become or initiate a weapon of mass destruction. 2. Is it right to integrate the systems of education, security, and mental health to prevent young people from growing up into deranged adults who may be capable of using weapons of mass destruction in the future?
  

• 
  Reformulate: these would really be two questions: 1) Can it be ethically justified for a person to become an arm of mass destruction? 2) What are the mechanisms on a psychological, social, and cultural level that must be implemented to prevent an individual from becoming or using arms of mass destruction?
  

• 
  Are there ethical fundaments to intervene in security, educational or health system to avoid access or use or massive destruction weapon or other technologies non-bellicose that could produce casualties of civilians?
  

• 
  Change (see CAPS): In this time period it is possible for an individual to become or initiate a weapon of mass destruction. HOW TO CHANGE OR RE-INVENT THE SYSTEMS of education, security, and mental health to prevent young people from growing up into deranged adults who may be capable of using weapons of mass destruction in the future?
  

• 
  I think this question is fantasy. There will always be deranged adults
  

• 
  This is probably not possible.
  

• 
  Education systems have little effect on moral growth.
  

• 
  Should education of the young include the study of religions and their impact on historic decision making?
  

• 
  I consider that it is not a future question, because already exists the possibility at the present time.
  

• 
  Adding to this: when is the state allowed to take children out of their parents custody or reduce their influence (for example by enforced daycare), if there is reasonable suspicion that the children can become a SIMAD or the like under the influence of their parents, or that the parents cannot prevent this?
  

• 
  ‘Educate against the use of weapons of mass destruction’ seems like a general question of whether we should prevent young people from becoming criminals.
  

• 
  Sure. Nowadays, an important part of the society relies on tools and mechanisms that affect the integral development of the young people who constitute the future leaders of the nations.
  

• 
  Yes, I think so.
  

• 
  Yes, indeed always it is an ethical duty.
  

• 
  Yes, of course, to both questions. I reiterate that our only protection is that our descendants have a lucid and ethical mind. This work must begin today, before it's too late.
  

• 
  Of course this is correct, education should include values.
  

• 
  Is it right to computer-augment or genetically enhance our pets and other animals’ brains?
  

• 
  Is it right to COMPUTATIONALLY augment or genetically enhance our pets and other animals?
  

• 
  Is it correct to technologically or genetically interfere with our pets and the brain of other animals to better their qualities or prolong their lives?
  

• 
  I do not believe that this action is connected with the improvement of the quality of life of the people. I consider that resources and efforts of this nature must be oriented towards the sustainable development of the nations.
  

• 
  Is it possible to enhance our pets’ brains by computer?
  

• 
  Why would we want to do this?
  

• 
  No, but that will not stop the practice, if it can be done, it will be.
  

• 
  No, I don't think so.
  

• 
  NO
  

• 
  Definitely not, I think it's important to respect the natural endowment of each species.
  

• 
  As in the previous field, I think that almost all the questions should be preceded by the expression "In what conditions”
  

• 
  Can we talk about International Community? If yes, what are her values and who preserves them?
  

• 
  What is the place of Education in the South?