-3
$\begingroup$

Let's say that we have found a way to remove the genomes from our bodies and minds that make our species so violent and destructive. Basically, we have found a way to make humans peacefull. If such a thing were to be accomplished, would the goverment, or more accurately, would the people accept this? And what if they did? How would life change after that?

$\endgroup$

closed as too broad by Cadence, Joe Bloggs, Giter, Magic-Mouse, Frostfyre Aug 8 '18 at 17:47

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer. Avoid asking multiple distinct questions at once. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I've VTC as story-based because, in a piece of speculative fiction like this, society's reaction to the change is the story. You can have a society that goes along with this, or a society that doesn't - either works, but they will lead to very different tones and structures for your work. $\endgroup$ – Cadence Aug 8 '18 at 17:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Humans are highly variable creatures. Notice how literally everyone you know is a human. ask them how they feel about this. you will not get two alike answers. so yes some people will accept it. but not EVERYONE will accept it. $\endgroup$ – Ummdustry Aug 8 '18 at 17:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There are several works of literature you could read that deal with this idea. From shallow entertainment (like the ughlies, that dips is toes in these aaters), to works examining the effects of this great a change on the human psyche (the gift), utopia? (1980s the world is, a utopia as mankind's dark nature's has been changed to a more enlightened being. There are a lot of great works that explore this question each draw there own conclusions as to the result is this change. $\endgroup$ – Garret Gang Aug 8 '18 at 17:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ford Prefect: "We'd replace your brain with a computer. No-one would notice the difference" Arthur Dent: "I'd notice the difference." Ford: "No, you'd be programmed not to." $\endgroup$ – DJClayworth Aug 8 '18 at 19:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ People who ask questions like this have never thought through what they're suggesting. Removing aggression doesn't just remove terrorism and war, it removes strong economies and civil planning. Removing risk-taking doesn't just remove drug and gambling addicts, it removes people who run into burning houses to save babies. There are no evil bahvioral traits just as there are no evil tools. There are only evil ways to use behavioral traits. So, removing the behavioral traits will create peace at the price of stagnation. It is impossible to strive for the best without risking the worst. $\endgroup$ – JBH Aug 8 '18 at 20:21
1
$\begingroup$

The following answer contains spoilers for Neal Stephenson's (excellent) book Seveneves

Below is one possible route that a story like this could take.

In Seveneves, the population of humanity is reduced by a cosmic catastrophe to seven women who are fortunate enough to have access to have access to machinery that can be used for germ-line modification of their own children. They come to the agreement that each woman is only allowed control over the genetics of their own children. Among other genetic changes, one of the seven women decides that aggressive behavior is the main problem that has lead humanity to be in such a dire state, so she commits her children to be the beginning of a new human race bread to be less aggressive.

 

One of the other women, however, objects to the premise that aggressiveness is a problem, and she decides that she wants her children to be the beginning of a heroic human race. Rather than breeding out aggressiveness, she wants to encourage aggressive behavior as long as it is channeled toward productive purpose.

 

Flash forward a few thousand years. Both women were successful, and their respective human races have bread more-or-less true throughout the years (through social processes Stephenson goes into detail about in his book). Society adapts to fit both of these new kinds of human (as well as the other five human races you might suspect exist due to the title).

 

I won't get into a huge amount of detail here, as the specifics are largely down to Stephenson's story, but the gist is that you end up with an integrated society of what are, basically, different species. Not in the scientific sense (they can interbreed just fine), but they take on very different roles in society. If your story features a two-group society like this, you might expect to find the more aggressive people tend to prefer jobs involving manual labor, exploration, risk, and heroism while the less aggressive people might prefer jobs in the sciences, as bureaucrats, or other more domestic professions.

That's only one possible outcome, of course. If either aggressiveness or non-aggressiveness offers a large competitive advantage for the group who choose to undergo / forego the alteration, you will likely find with time that society ends up largely embracing one route over the other.

Ultimately, this is your world, and you can contrive events to have the people and the governments react as you wish. I would recommend you decide on what you think would be the most interesting story to tell, and focus on that. Then come back and ask more specific questions about the route you choose to take the story down.

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.