De-extinction, challenges and threatens.

After study with the  specific analysis of the potential crisis leading to the extinction of homing pigeons, the concept of de-extinction was introduced by Kasperbauer. In fact, the idea of resuming extinction has existed for a long time, because since the rapid development of mankind, the environmental pollution and ecological damage caused by industrialization have become more and more serious, and this effect has accelerated the extinction and disappearance of species. This is a painful thing for human beings and the natural world. If conditions permit, the idea of resuming extinction is not impossible. However, whether the moral ethics and environmental ethics contained in it are in line with the status quo of survival is complicated. And far-reaching thinking content. Kasperbauer pointed out that he focused on the extinction value. The development of de-extinction technology has not yet reached a reliable realization.

So when Kasperbauer uses biotechnology, the idea that the genome is combined with the embryo and develops sounds effective, but the result is that there are genetic differences between the extinct species and the previously extinct species, and their offspring are 80% similar- 90% (2017). In fact, this shows that there is still a lot of room for the complete restoration of extinction. The reason may be the developmental environment or genetic changes. So in this case, the resulting situation is unpredictable. And how do we choose the species to return to extinction? How do we consider whether a species is worthy of restoration? First, consider the impact on the ecological environment, and secondly, are human interests? Is the current ecological environment suitable for extinct species? Should it be abandoned if it has nothing to do with human interests or species that cannot satisfy human interests? This is one of the profound issues that are very complex and contains ethics. Therefore, we assume that the restoration of extinction can be achieved. Taking into account that the reproduction of ancient biological embryos requires specific development occasions, and the physiological structure of modern organisms and ancient organisms have obvious differences when people want to use modern organisms to breed ancient biological embryos, it is very difficult. Moreover, there are huge differences between the current ecological environment of the earth and ancient times. Therefore, even if the ancient species is restored, if the environment suitable for the survival of this species cannot be reconstructed, the survival rate of this species is difficult to guarantee (2018).

Kasperbauer pointed out the five challenges of de-extinction, these are also our concerns. I want to explain two of the challenges. The first is that there may still be reasons for the extinction of species in the current living conditions. We cannot know whether the reasons leading to species extinction are eradicated, because of the complexity of the reasons, and the reasons for existence are likely to accumulate and evolve over time and have become or diverge into more potential causes of extinction. Therefore, if we do not completely eradicate the root cause of the existential threat to extinct species, then even if we resurrect them, the survival rate will be difficult to guarantee. The second challenge is related to the invasion. Kasperbauer proposed that people can genetically modify extinct species to make them less aggressive, but more friendly(2017). I think this challenge is unethical. I think it is not advisable if we can modify the genes of extinct species to be what we want. Because every species, no matter what attributes it is, is given by nature and conforms to the laws of nature. Human beings have no right to change the genes of any species, even if it is of great benefit to the interests of mankind, this is against ethics. So this is a very worthy question.

Although de-extinction technology is still immature, I think it can still help human beings make up for the extinction caused by their own faults. It is also a feasible idea to restore the diversity of the ecological environment. Therefore, when we measure whether this technology should be widely used, I hope that it can continue to progress in accordance with the changes of the times and the progress of human thinking while avoiding the survival threats brought by the restoration of extinction to species and humans, which is the most meaningful.

work cited:

Kasperbauer, T.J. (2017). Should We Bring Back the Passenger Pigeon? The Ethics of De-Extinction. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 20(1): 1-14.

Zhihu. (2018). Could we use DNA technology to realize de-extinction? https://www.zhihu.com/question/304934951

print

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *