If the 'evil gene' were actually discovered. What do you think should be done about it?

I don’t think according to our laws, we could do anything about it until it was expressed in some way.

Perhaps mark the person to be watched.

>>implying that there is actually an objective definition of evil

@ragingloli… Yeh, I personally dont believe in ‘evil’ or that there is an ‘evil gene’. It’s just smething that came up over a discussion.

If you wanted to remove it by genetic engineering, you’d need to come up with a 100% sensitive and specific gene test. Even mutations such as cystic fibrosis and the BRCA1 breast cancer mutation are missed sometimes. Then you’d have to make sure the gene wasn’t linked to something important. (Attempts at curing the “boy-in-the-bubble” disease with gene therapy have led to leukemia in these kids because the therapy knocked out something important.)

Most likely, you’d want to remove the gene in utero. Then you’d have to deal with all the people screaming about increased abortions if the gene was discovered. Tough issue.

The question shows a profound misunderstanding of genetics. There can be no such thing as an “Evil” gene, and for that reason it will never be found. There can be such a thing as polygenic traits, but just because they occur in someone’s genome doesn’t mean that they will ever necessarily be expressed.

@dpworkin Interesting! Do you mind explaing a little more? You are saying the possibility is there regardless?

Also how do you define evil anyways one would have to figure anything that is considered to a person to be evil should be “disabled” via genetics is rather insane really….

It depends on what the definition of “evil” for this particular gene would be, and on the particulars of how it was expressed and whatever.

@Janka No, it doesn’t. There can be no “particular” gene for such a complex phenomenon, unless you defined evil so narrowly that it had no meaning, and was therefore nonthreatening.

@dpworkin Well people(most) may agree killing another person is evil but what do you try and do for that?

The genes that have us react to say defend ourselves,“kill” things bug,animals,etc… anger whatnot. Shutting those off would be hard and in ways do more harm would’nt it?

:::sigh::: It is a widespread idea in our culture that there must be a “smart” gene, and a “psychopath” gene, and a “homosexual” gene, and so on. It simply doesn’t work that way. All these phenomena are far too complex to be moderated by a single gene. All these processes involve many different genes working together in many obscure ways, and interacting with many environmental to produce very different results from individual to individual. Would that it were as simple as you propose!

@dpworkin I do not know anything about genetics, so I am only guessing but I did figure as much because you would have to find every link that controls this part to the part…..it would be endless almost?

@dpworkin…. thanks for your response, but I know there isn’t an evil gene, this is purely a hypothetical discussion to examine the moral aspects & any possible hypothetical impact on society.

Exactly! Think of it as a huge interactive network, with complex variations. It is true that in medicine we may actually be able to find particular genes for particular issues, but behavioral traits will never be that simple. (For example, we know that Downs syndrome is caused by an anomaly on a particular gene)

Good link on an evil gene!

www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=2892 -

I think maybe a way to look at is forget the words “evil” and “good” and just look at as this is a human being, a creature.

This is what is capable of, this what we can do…Messing with genes would interfere with what we can do, or possibly can not do?

Leave my evil gene alone!

@AstroChuck…. Hehehe, it’s all yours buddy :)

You just want to get into my genes! :-)

my best genes ran down my daddy’s leg!

@BoBo1946, gross…. but funny :)

@TheJoker loll..heard that one a longtime ago!

Inject tons of it into myself, so I can take over the world.

@BoBo1946, an oldie but a goodie!

@sweetteaindahouse…. have you ever seen the cartoon ‘Pinkie & the Brain’ I think it might be right up your street :)

@TheJoker I grew up watching that show.

@dpworkin (didn’t it used to be pdworkin? am I going MAD????) has it spot on and I agree with everything he says… but if genes could be isolated I would say leave it well alone because evil is a necessary evil

@sweetteaindahouse…. Hehe, ace! Well you can have the world, just leave me Gotham!

Nothing. If you take what we consider ‘evil’ out of the world, then it would just be replaced with another standard. It wouldn’t do any good.

It’s probably a combination of genes and environmental factors. Epigenetics seems to play a major role as well. Psychopaths might fit your definition of evil. There’s the so-called

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hare_Psychopathy_Checklist

and I’ve also read articles about new neuroscientific research like conducting fMRI scans of prison inmates. Psychopaths do not experience fear or remorse (in a normal way) for example. And the scans seem to confirm this. The amygdala remains silent when it shouldn’t.

Genetic engineering? Maybe we can start with changing the environment and use the epigenetic power which is capable of switching off genes and switching on other genes.

@TheJoker No problem. Gotham is a dirty city anyway.

@sweetteaindahouse…. Haha, time for some cleansing fire perhaps!!!!

Psychopathy is a congenital inability to feel empathy, remorse, or any of the emotions necessary to form a conscience, coupled with a high need for stimulation, impulsiveness, opportunism, often culminating in a callousness disregard for the rights and feelings of others. Such people become tend to become predatory toward their fellow human being, and when they do, they closely resemble what most people would regard as “true evil.”

There are some studies of twins reared apart that strongly suggest that psychopathy may be inherited. Robert Hare (and others) have gone so far as to described psychopathy as a phenotype—a distinctive kind of trait arising through the interaction between the genome and the environment—as opposed to a developmental condition. In this respect, psychopathy appears linked to autism, which also involves a lack of empathy, little ability to form friendships, one-sided conversation, and difficulties in handling external stimulation.

I agree with @dpworkin, however, that the genetics involved are anything but straight-forward, especially since both conditions exist in varying degrees; so it is not a simple “on-off” affair. It very likely involves a complex of interacting genes, and perhaps even metagenetic factors. The search is on for brain imaging tests that can reliably detect who is and who is not a psychopath. The researchers know that there is definitely faulty wiring in the brains of psychopaths, but there is a lot of faulty wiring in non-psychopath’s brains too; so the difficulty is in devising a test with enough specificity that it does not return unacceptably high levels of false positives while still detecting the characteristic of interest.

Now to the issue of whether such a technology should be used once it is perfected: Certainly it would make sense to screen people out of sensitive positions so that they don’t become political leaders. The temptation, however, would be to remove them from all walks of life, or at least put a tag on them so that they can be sequestered if they become truly dangerous. That sets up some ominous precedents if they haven’t committed any crime, or if they are thrown into prison where they are made orders of magnitude worse. Psychopaths are notoriously resistant to any conventional form of treatment—in fact, it actually seems to make them worse. They seem to do well in armies because they can kill without any stress or remorse.

From an evolutionary biology point of view, predators greatly accelerate the evolution of a species, so there may be hidden benefits to the ostensible costs of all the criminality.

Has anyone actually postulated the existence of such a gene? Seems dubious to me.

@Zuma Thank you. That was worth waiting for.

@IchtheosaurusRex…. I’ve never heard any serious scientist talking about it. Someone mentioned it in a discussion I was having with some friends about a recent & horrific case that happened in the UK recently.

@Zuma Awesome…. the ending part there is a bit scary in way makes me wonder if we are hindering ourselves then? Hm…

@Zuma my hat is off to you…great answer!

Watch the movie “Gatica”

It covers this exact scenario, and is pretty good. Uma Thurman and Jude Law I believe.

Thank you all.

@mowens I think you may be thinking of the movie Minority Report, Gattaca, as I recall, is about genetic discrimination and identity theft (sort of).

The dictionary definition of evil is

1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.
2. harmful; injurious: evil laws.
3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: to be fallen on evil days.
4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: an evil reputation.
5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: He is known for his evil disposition.
–noun
6. that which is evil; evil quality, intention, or conduct: to choose the lesser of two evils.
7. the force in nature that governs and gives rise to wickedness and sin.
8. the wicked or immoral part of someone or something: The evil in his nature has destroyed the good.
9. harm; mischief; misfortune: to wish one evil.
10. anything causing injury or harm: Tobacco is considered by some to be an evil.
11. a harmful aspect, effect, or consequence: the evils of alcohol.
12. a disease, as king’s evil.

Viruses inflict harm and pain on their hosts, I don’t know of any benevolent viruses that actually help you out. Viruses are also nothing more than a sequence of genes. So yes, genes can be evil according to the dictionary definition of evil. Can a human gene sequence produce evil tendancies? Most probably. Do humans have freewill? Certainly. Do Viruses have freewill? No. They follow a simple genetic program. What is freewill? The ability to reprogram yourself, although that never occurs at a genetic level.

Since behavior is most likely a combination of genetics and environment, a person with all the genetic background to be dangerous, but raised in an environment that discouraged antisocial behavior would be harmless. Marking such a person based on genetics alone would be tragically unjust.

@dpworkin : yes, I agree that there cannot likely be one gene for even the simplest definition of evil. However, I still maintain that what should be done if gene/genes associated to some definition of evil existed in some form depends on 1) the definition of evil, and 2) the exact mechanics of the genetics. Especially, like you say, the latter are likely to be extremely complex; that we could simply locate one Gene for all Bad Stuff is impossible. What I am trying to say is that to give any sort of answer, you need to interpret the question in some way that is plausible (“suppose a group of mutations predisposing a person for selfishness was discovered”, maybe?), and the answer will depend more on the details than on general principles.

@ragingloli
I lurve you for using 4chan code on Fluther.

Paradoxically, what springs to mind as the uber-example of “evil” in our time is Hitler and what was he doing but trying to produce a master race by elliminating undesirable humans and their genetic material!

@Zuma Both apply. In Gattaca, they were talking about violent genes and how they were removed.

So sociopaths, like Ted Bundy and Charlie Manson, lack(ed) that certain something. Is it a gene? Can we find the sociopaths and manipulate their DNA to supply them with such a gene? Would that be right?

Edit: “eliminating”

Fact from fiction, truth from diction. Great to see ya still around Joker. IF that gene existed and could be detected I am sure they would be close to having (if they didn’t have) a way to counter it. Should they be able to extract it from the parson as a child that seem to be the most humane way to go to me. Better for the child who would commit a crime when older and his/her victims. If they had not counter or antidote then at least you can monitor them and maybe combat it by way of therapy. But you have to do something, it would be like discovering a smoldering ember in the cushions of your sofa and thinking not to do anything until the flames popped out of it.

absolutely…..nothing. just let evil run its course.

I’m giving lurve to @ragingloli and @dpworkin and adding as much as am extreme in my views of what to do with violent rapists, child molestors and torturers, a gene of some sort marking them for that particular kind of violence doesn’t convince me they’ll act out.

Wouldn’t matter what you do with it, you could gather it all up and stuff it in a bottle. There will always be someone who just has to let the geneie out of the bottle.

@Hypocrisy_Central… thats a great analogy!

@Silhouette…. human nature can be a dangerous thing!