Thanks to War on Error for bringing this story to our attention: Basically, scientists are proceeding with plans to develop genetic chimeras (pronounced Kye-mare-uhs) with human brain cells, and some bioethicists are worried that non-human brains with human cells could have emergent properties like some features of human consciousness. To address those concerns, guidelines were established whereby animals exhibiting overly intelligent behavior would be killed immediately, and that seems painfully reactionary and ethically ass-backwards.
First of all, why the hell not create genetic chimeras? Okay, there is a legitimate danger of disease transmission - namely, diseases adapted to other species evolving to jump into human tissues and organs through the host animal. Biologists have been aware of that danger for some time, and yet have concluded that things like organ transplants using ordinary animal organs and tissues are worth the risk.
There's also the small matter of human eating habits: Namely, that we stuff animals together in unbelievable numbers and densities, feed them antibiotics by the truckload, feed them the pureed carcasses of their own species, and that basically this is the ultimate breeding ground for disease. IOW, current practices that are in no danger of being outlawed are exceedingly stupid and dangerous, while the opposition to chimeras is mostly emotional rather than rational or moral.
Secondly, the scientific guideline calling for animals that develop emergent consciousness from human brain cells to be summarily killed is just insane. (1)If they're conscious, you don't have a right to kill them, do you? (2)Why would it be a bad thing anyway? The idea that it would be some kind of nightmare existence - a "human trapped in the body of an animal" - is a fantasy. It would only be a nightmare if you somehow transferred an existing human into an animal body, which for the moment and for probably the remainder of this century is just science fiction. But a small kernel of intelligent self-awareness born into a mouse, a sheep, or whatever is not going to see anything wrong with itself, provided it's healthy.
So that last aspect is the tricky part. Can they make chimeras that don't spend their whole lives physically or psychologically suffering? If they can't, then there is no ethical justification for creating them. If they can, there is no ethical objection to going as far as anyone pleases with the technology. Since scientific ethicists have apparently reached the conclusion that it's okay to pursue chimera technology, I see no legitimate moral restraints on how far to go with it. Fearful reactions against interference in the so-called "Natural Order" is the domain of religion and ideology, not science.
Moreover, if they did see an animal acting preternaturally intelligent, what kind of sick reaction would it be to say "Hey, this mouse might be human - KILL IT!" Shouldn't you take that mouse and try to make it happy while observing all the weird ways it acts intelligent? Hell, shouldn't it be an objective of science to spread the glory of both analytical and emotional intelligence throughout terrestrial biology? Maybe it would be a little harder - just a little - to see other living things as property if they could personally dispute it, or at least behave more cleverly to stymie human attempts to control them.
We humans cherish our power to kill other animals without consequences, but what would happen if the result of shooting a bird is that the other birds remember your face and hate you for the rest of their lives? Suppose they follow you home and remember where you live, shit all over your car every day, rip up your gardens, and basically go to war with you over your "murder"? The world would rapidly become a much more interesting place if intelligence were to suddenly go viral across multiple species. You might have to be more thoughtful about how, when, and what you hunt; how you treat pets; and other matters people usually don't think about.
And, of course, not all of it would be competition and retaliation: Some of it would be cooperation, and the evolution of culture in more recognizable forms among non-human animals. You could have something like David Brin's Uplift series, where humans have genetically modified dolphins and chimps to human-level intelligence and given them technologies to be able to communicate and interact with us. But take it to its ultimate extreme: Why not some aspect of human consciousness in everything? Why not elevate everything remotely physiologically capable of it to self-awareness and empathy?
Why not alter the brains of predator species so they feel guilty about eating, and self-regulate their own behavior instead of by some "invisible hand" of natural selection driven by famine? Alter the brains of herbivores to be capable of thinking ahead so they can eat in ways that are most ecologically beneficial and guarantee the best food supply for themselves over the long-term? Why not introduce the light of consciousness into wild animal populations and see what happens, how they compete? Animals are going extinct by the bushel because of human intelligence, and only a much smaller number are surviving because of it, so maybe we can share the wealth a bit.
As long as we don't share it with spiders. I hate spiders. :D
