Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T21:06:26.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Human Enhancement in Space a Moral Duty? Missions to Mars, Advanced AI and Genome Editing in Space

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2019

KONRAD SZOCIK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Any space program involving long-term human missions will have to cope with serious risks to human health and life. Because currently available countermeasures are insufficient in the long term, there is a need for new, more radical solutions. One possibility is a program of human enhancement for future deep space mission astronauts. This paper discusses the challenges for long-term human missions of a space environment, opening the possibility of serious consideration of human enhancement and a fully automated space exploration, based on highly advanced AI. The author argues that for such projects, there are strong reasons to consider human enhancement, including gene editing of germ line and somatic cells, as a moral duty.

Keywords

Human mission to Marshuman deep space missionshuman enhancementgene editingmoral dutyAI
Type
Special Section: Open Forum
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 2020 , pp. 122 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Rees, M. On the Future. Prospects for Humanity. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press; 2018, at 150–1.Google Scholar

2. Sion, N. Can astronauts survive radiation on prolonged space missions? CRPA / ACRP Bulletin 2011;31(4):22.Google Scholar

3. See note 2, Sion 2011.

4. Szocik, K, Elias Marques, R, Abood, S, Lysenko-Ryba, K, Minich, D, Kędzior, A. Biological and social challenges of human reproduction in a long-term Mars base. Futures 2018;100:56–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5. Shelhamer, M. Trends in sensorimotor research and countermeasures for exploration-class space flights. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 2015;9:115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

6. Nelson, M. Some ecological and human lessons of biosphere 2. European Journal of Ecology 2018;4(1):50–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Levchenko, I, Xu, S, Mazouffre, S, Keidar, M, Bazaka, K. Mars colonization: Beyond getting there. Global Challenges 2018; doi: 10.1002/gch2.201800062.Google Scholar

8. Impey, C. Beyond: Our Future in Space. New York, NY: W.W. Norton and Company; 2015.Google Scholar

9. Braddock, M. Artificial gravity: Small steps on the journey to the giant leap. Journal of Space Exploration 2017;6(3):137.Google Scholar

10. Allen, SC, Burnett, R, Charles, J, Cucinotta, F, Fullerton, R, Goodman, JR, et al. Guidelines and Capabilities for Designing Human Missions. NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 2003.Google Scholar

11. Ian, MM, Rhodes, RA, Davis, KN. Performance of the Z-2 space suit in a simulated microgravity environment. 48th International Conference on Environmental Systems ICES-2018-71, 8–12 July 2018, Albuquerque, New Mexico.Google Scholar

12. Durante, M. Space radiation protection: Destination Mars. Life Sciences in Space Research 2014;1:2–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

13. Clancy, P, Brack, A, Hornick, G. Looking for Life. Search the Solar System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.Google Scholar

14. Crawford, IA. Dispelling the myth of robotic efficiency: Why human space exploration will tell us more about the Solar System than will robotic exploration alone. Astronomy and Geophysics 2012;53:2.22–2.26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. See note 14, Crawford 2012.

16. Arroyo IH. Do space travel benefits for humanity outweigh the investments made? Analysis of the scientific, historical and moral reasons used to justify investments in space travel; available at https://itslide.net/document/space-travel-investment-and-benefits (last accessed Aug 5 2019).

17. Szocik, K. Should and could humans go to Mars? Yes, but not now and not in the near future. Futures 2019;105:54–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18. Allen, SC, Burnett, R, Charles, J, Cucinotta, F, Fullerton, R, Goodman, JR, et al. Guidelines and Capabilities for Designing Human Missions. NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 2003.Google Scholar

19. The Chinese researcher He Jiankui conducted genetic modification of embryos, and then twins have been born. This experiment has been widely criticized; see: Cyranoski, D, Ledford, H. International outcry over genome-edited baby claim. Nature 2018;563:607–8;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Savulescu, J, Singer, P. An ethical pathway for gene editing. Bioethics 2019;33:221–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

20. Persson, I, Savulescu, J. The art of misunderstanding moral bioenhancement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2015;24(2):48–57;CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed Persson, I, Savulescu, J. The Duty to be Morally Enhanced. Topoi 2017, doi: 10.1007/s11245-017-9475-7.Google ScholarPubMed

21. Chien, SK, Wagstaff, L. Robotic space exploration agents. Science Robotics 2017; 2:eaan4831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22. Gao, Y, Chien, S. Review on space robotics: Toward top-level science through space exploration. Science Robotics 2017; 2:eaan50742017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. Lester, DF, Hodges, KV, Anderson, RC. Exploration telepresence: A strategy for optimizing scientific research at remote space destinations. Science Robotics 2017; 2:eaan4383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24. Yang, G-Z, Bellingham, J, Dupont, PE, Fischer, P, Floridi, L, Full, R, et al. The grand challenges of Science Robotics. Science Robotics 2018; 3:eaar7650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25. Dignum, V. Ethics in artificial intelligence: Introduction to the special issue. Ethics and Information Technology 2018;20:1–3, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9450-z;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Wang, W, Siau, K. Ethical and Moral Issues with AI – A Case Study on Healthcare Robots. Emergent Research Forum (ERF), Twenty-fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans 2018.Google Scholar

26. Torresen, J. A review of future and ethical perspectives of robotics and AI. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 2018;4:75, doi: 10.3389/frobt.2017.00075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. Bostrom, N, Yudkowsky, E. The ethics of artificial intelligence. In: Frankish, K, Ramsey, WM, eds. The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press; 316–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28. Gyngell, C, Bowman-Smart, H, Savulescu, J. Moral reasons to edit the human genome: Picking up from the Nuffield report. Journal of Medical Ethics 2019. First published online: 24 Jan 2019, doi: 10.1136/medethics-2018-105084.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed