Our understanding of Darwinian evolution is that the environment favours certain individuals of a species each generation. These individuals end up passing on their genes more than others. If two individuals have offspring together, there is random crossover between their DNA as it’s passed on. Furthermore, some random mutations are introduced which could lead to a change in fitness with respect to the environment.
What’s interesting is that humanity’s environment has drastically changed as our technology has advanced, particularly in the field of medicine. Penicillin was only discovered by Alexander Fleming in 19281. Up until the 1940s some doctors would recommend smoking2. And it wasn’t until Covid appeared that RNA vaccines became so widespread3.
What this means is that previous evolutionary pressures have been removed. Individuals that may have been impeded in the past now go on to live full lives, and pass on their genes. This is of course a moral victory, and much suffering has been avoided. It also means that all sorts of evolutionary pathways will be explored. Perhaps at some point a subset of the human population will have twelve fingers. Perhaps a majority will have asthma that is treated. Depending on what genes become dominant in the population, we may come to depend on our technology for survival ever more.
An interesting counterpoint is that perhaps some evolutionary pressures are being added. I suspect this may take on a social aspect. For example, for quite some time in the past, some level of obesity was perhaps considered more desirable4 than it is in today’s mainstream (I refer only to social norms here, not my point of view - everyone is of course beautiful). This may result in different behaviours, but perhaps also different genetic pressures. Different attributes may be favoured in different times, perhaps leading to some level of population selection.
Returning to the cases where evolutionary pressures have been removed, one outcome is that all sorts of genetic variety will emerge, good and bad. Indeed, some genetic traits may be quite undesirable to the individuals affected, and yet modern medicine will keep them alive and otherwise healthy. A simple example would be being born with weak knees. One can certainly survive and procreate, but wouldn’t it be nicer to be born with naturally strong and flexible knees?
In the absence of selection pressure, it seems inevitable that beyond continued advances in medicine to treat harmful traits, we may be led to extend our reach and modify our DNA itself.
I won’t get into the ethics and dangers of this here. I merely wish to highlight that advances in technology that lead to changes in natural selection mean many more genetic paths will be explored in humanity. And this means compassion will drive us towards genetic engineering. These seem to be two sides of the same coin.