When the gene-editing pioneer, as what Dr. HE wants to be referred to as, was shackled back then; this is what I wrote in 2018 initially on twitter:
when I presume, the whole World was condemning him.
I’ve always supported Conscious AI too, just sharing one amongst hundreds of poetries that I’ve written on it (Link: https://www.jpranavc.com/2018/12/the-transcendence-touch.html ), to give you a glimpse of philosophical idea about it.The support was not for editing of existing roots, but a giant leap towards understanding & formation of synthetic new roots too altogether, under the ambit of species another.
Of course, there’s a difference between Radical AND Radicalized Science. I’ve supported Radical Science, and NOT Radicalized Science. So, what’s the difference? Understanding Viruses, is Radical Science. But, making Bioweapons out of it is Radicalized Science. Notice the difference!
What Dr. HE did came under the ambit of Radical Science, and Not Radicalized Science. Similarly, My Literature too is restricted to Radical Science which includes Species Another, AGI, etc; and NOT Radicalized Science!
But who should be authorized to decide what is radical or radicalized? The collective human minds create a distorted image, just like out of sync AI, as been fed with many logics, illogical aspects, funding, grants, NGOs etc. In such a situation, no clear image would be generated.
Again, it is the viewers’, readers’ discretion what constitutes’ radical or radicalized science, and open for endless debates. But, in parallel, radical science should continue!
Also, on a separate context, what defines Rocket Scientist & Rocket Engineer, this is where I discussed (Link: https://www.jpranavc.com/2020/12/rocket-scientist-or-rocket-engineer.html ) and why Radical Science needs to continue! Then, whether the Tech part of it is Radicalized or not, can be debated later!😊
© Pranav Chaturvedi 2025