But even giving them less then optimal features—intelligence, strength, looks—is quite equivalent to making them stupidier, weaker, uglier.
I don’t believe that killing someone is equivalent to letting him die. Why should I believe that making someone stupid is equivalent to letting him be stupid?
Also, cheating on someone to improve the health of the offspring results in a non-identity problem since the offspring is not the same one that would have been created without cheating, so whether the offspring is benefited is questionable.
You’re right. I got way too far with claiming equivalence.
As for non-identity problem—I have trouble answering it. I don’t want to defend my idea, but I can think of an example when one brings up non-identity and comes to wrong conclusion: Drinking alcohol while pregnant can cause a fetus to develop a brain damage. But such grave brain damage means this baby is not the same one, that would be created, if his mother didn’t drink. So it is questionable that the baby would benefit from its mother abstinence.
I don’t believe that killing someone is equivalent to letting him die. Why should I believe that making someone stupid is equivalent to letting him be stupid?
Also, cheating on someone to improve the health of the offspring results in a non-identity problem since the offspring is not the same one that would have been created without cheating, so whether the offspring is benefited is questionable.
You’re right. I got way too far with claiming equivalence.
As for non-identity problem—I have trouble answering it. I don’t want to defend my idea, but I can think of an example when one brings up non-identity and comes to wrong conclusion: Drinking alcohol while pregnant can cause a fetus to develop a brain damage. But such grave brain damage means this baby is not the same one, that would be created, if his mother didn’t drink. So it is questionable that the baby would benefit from its mother abstinence.