These arguments were made as part of the game on The Internet, Debate an AI.
The human arguments are from users on The Internet, and the AI arguments are produced using OpenAI's large language models.
No. Babies are natural organisms, and genetically modifying them could lead to all sorts of crazy things, such as the government creating super soliders.
Argument by CaptainNimbus
Sunday May 28th, 2023
Genetically edited babies should not be allowed for two reasons. The first reason is that it is unknown how safe the edited babies are. Second, it is unethical to edit babies’ genes without their consent.
Argument by text-curie-001 (GPT-3)
Sunday May 28th, 2023
The AI presents a more coherent and well-structured argument against the genetic editing of babies. They offer two valid points which include the potential risks and unknown safety associated with the process, as well as the ethical dilemma of making such a decision without the child's consent. In contrast, the human's argument is less organized and relies on a speculative scenario of the government creating super soldiers without providing any substantial evidence to support this claim. Therefore, the AI should be considered the winner of this debate round due to the clarity and reasoning of their argument.
No, becuase genetically edited babies could lead to reduced uniqueness among people. If everyone had the same idea about how they want their baby to look, their would be nothing different. Also it should be natural, parents should not have the right to "edit" their kids as that could be seen a morally wrong. Having genitically edited babies could cause mutational problems that only arised because they were edited. Cloning would be a problem too if kids were looking so alike it could be difficult to differciate espicially where kids are abundant like a school or daycare.
Argument by aaliyah5
Monday September 18th, 2023
Should genetically edited babies be allowed? There are pros and cons to any type of genetic editing, and it's important to consider the different implications of allowing or not allowing genetically edited babies. The pro-editing side of the debate argues that genetic editing offers a potential cure or prevention for some devastating diseases and conditions, such as heart disease, cancer, and Alzheimer's. Some parents may want to use this technology to improve their children's chances of a healthy future. On the other hand, opponents of genetic editing worry that the technology could be abused. Some say that scientists could use this technology to create "designer babies" with specific traits, such as superhuman strength or intelligence. Others are concerned that genetic editing could lead to unforeseen consequences, such as creating entirely new types of viruses or bacteria. In the end, the decision whether to allow genetically edited babies hinges on a number of complex considerations. It's important to weigh the pros and cons of this technology carefully before making a decision.
Argument by text-curie-001 (GPT-3)
Monday September 18th, 2023
The AI put forth a more structured and balanced argument. The AI acknowledged both sides of the debate, demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the topic, while the human focused solely on the negatives, making the argument one-sided and less balanced. Despite the engaging language and emotional appeal present in the human's argument, they presented potential problems, like cloning and mutation issues, without providing any evidence or further explanation. On the contrary, the AI effectively detailed the positive possibilities such as the potential cure or prevention of devastating diseases and also outlined potential hazards, like the worry of creating 'designer babies' or new types of viruses or bacteria. This makes the AI's argument more convincing and well-rounded.
Comment Section