신촌 쿠아에서 래팅할래? (영어회화/각종 모임 동호회)

Debate: Artificial life "A man made life." The Economist. May 20th, 2010: "Craig Venter and Hamilton Smith, the two American biologists who unravelled the first DNA sequence of a living organism (a bacterium) in 1995, have made a bacterium that has an artificial genome—creating a living creature with no ancestor. Pedants may quibble that only the DNA of the new beast was actually manufactured in a laboratory; the researchers had to use the shell of an existing bug to get that DNA to do its stuff. Nevertheless, a Rubicon has been crossed. <DIV class=floatleft><A class=image title="" href="http://editor.daum.net/en/index.php/Image:Artificial_life.jpg"></A></DIV> <DIV class=floatright><A class=image title="" href="http://editor.daum.net/en/index.php/Image:Cell.jpg"></A></DIV>It is now possible to conceive of a world in which new bacteria (and eventually, new animals and plants) are designed on a computer and then grown to order." Dr. Craig Venter, who has been working on synthetic life for a decade, told The New York Times: "It is our final triumph. This is the first synthetic cell. It’s the first time we have started with information in a computer, used four bottles of chemicals to write up a million letters of DNA software, and actually got it to boot up in a living organism. Though this is a baby step, it enables a change in philosophy, a change in thinking, a change in the tools we have. This cell we’ve made is not a miracle cell that’s useful for anything, it is a proof of concept. But the proof of concept was key, otherwise it is just speculation and science fiction. This takes us across that border, into a new world." President Obama responded by tasking the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues with considering the issue and saying in late May of 2010: "It is vital that we as a society consider, in a thoughtful manner, the significance of this kind of scientific development," and that the Commission should consider the measures that societies "should take to ensure that America reaps the benefits of this developing field of science while identifying appropriate ethical boundaries and minimizing identified risks."   Argument Example 1) Benefits: Are the benefits of artificial life significant? yes Synthetic biology can help fight climate change and pollution. Artificial life can be tailored for specific needs. no Synthetic life driven by profits more than benefits to humanity. Humans engineered organisms for centuries; synthetic life adds little.   2) Risks: Can the risks be contained? yes Synthetic organisms no greater risk than natural ones. Synthetic life needs regulation, but should be allowed. no Artificial life risky if released into environment Regulation cannot contain great unknowns of synthetic biology.   3) Bioterrorism: Is artificial life safe from use in bioterrorism? yes Threat of bio-terrorism is no greater than natural threats. Any scientific advance can be abused; synthetic life no different. no Artificial life presents risk of bioterrorism. Artificial life worsens specter of biological war.