What would the world be like if all humans are no longer naturally born? Everyone are born in test tubes like clones in order to make the human race perfect. Also all children are raise in development schools to become different workers and crime is low. Would we no longer have fun sex? Would religion be gone? Would families be gone too? What do you think?
Ever read A Brave New World? You just laid out its premise exactly (like to a tee exactly). It's been a while since I've read it, but IIRC people only have sex for fun, there are no nuclear families, and maybe there was no religion? Or religion was replaced with another sort of ethos? Not sure. Somebody on here will remember it better than I.
Then Soylent Green is not all natural and organic. Well it depends on your society. I read a short story in the collection Brave New Worlds, where men and women are not allowed to interact outside of work. Also everyone is state mandated homosexual. They reproduce by having a weird ceremony where all the legal age women ovulate into a large waist deep pool, And the men come in after, to fertilize the eggs. (It was strange) But some how they made it work, and they were a Tech adv society. So as long as our ruling body/gov is not too opressive about human sexuality and intercourse, I think kinky sex would exist is some form. In the Bios of a Space Tyrant, it is mandatory for the Naval staff to get laid. They are given pills to inhibit reproduction, but they get to bone in zero-G. It is also dependent on the rulers/gov if they have abolished or are pro religion. Though it would be a major part of the regimes rule, and proably be one of the Right Wing Christian dictatorships of some kind. Why not just have an overlap where it is part of a religion (make one up) to have kinky sex, and save your self some trouble my good sir. Good luck with your sex/relig thing.
My setting is kind of like Brave New World, but I never read the book. Religion is science and I suppose sex is just for fun.
How good is the AI? Robots could do the really dangerous stuff, unless you need humans to fight wars. It all depends on your bias towards Machines.
Not all have AI's. I thought it would be cool if they use robots to fight their wars instead of using humans.
I don't think the world would change much at all. We'd have a lot less genetic diseases, but those will largely be eliminated before we're able to completely remove the woman from the formula. Selective breeding or breeding to fill jobs would be a sociological construct, and you'd have to think of a way to get humans to that point. It's extremely unlikely that they'd do so democratically, so you'd need a Hitler or a Stalin to implement such a system. I imagine we'd have even more sex. If we completely separate sex and procreation, we'd probably sterilize ourselves and enjoy casual sex even more than we do now.
What @Homer Potvin said. You are describing Brave New World. If you want to write something for fun, no problem. If you want to publish it, I don't think you will get there.
It's also the premiss (less perfectly so, but still pretty damned close) to The City and the Stars by Arthur C. Clarke. This was a common premiss in Golden Age Science Fiction because while the real-world technology was sufficiently advanced for us to start thinking and worrying about such things, the tech necessary for the story to happen was still pretty far off, still in the realms of Tomorrow. Regardless - to the OP - if it's genuinely the whole world, and not just the World We Engage as Westerners™ (where our eyes kinda' lose focus as we pass over parts of the globe that we don't engage or know anything about on an individual citizen level), then my answer is ennui. What's the point of living in this world? This life is dull af. And that's pretty much what Clarke says in his TCatS novel too.
It is only for the setting. The story will only focus on the main characters and their actions. But the reader will learn some details about their world from expositions. Could a post apocalyptic be the answer of why the world changed that way? It happened in the Hunger Games series, which is why the Capitol and the districts exist.
The question you've got to ask yourself is why the story has to take place inside this setting. If you can just skirt around without exploring it as BNW does, isn't it just flab you can slice off? As to your question re: the conditions for such a society existing: a fertility crisis a la Children of Men / The Handmaid's Tale would cause people to resort to cloning. But, this seems to jar with your original proposal for the setting where the cloning was done My suggestion here is: pick one. Either you want a eugenics-oriented body perfection programme or you want a fertility crisis. If you want post-apocalypse, the second is more feasible.
It is to make the setting interesting. It does provide some morals and how a setting g like that would affect the characters. But I suppose reading the story is better than trying to explain it.
That could make sense, especially if the government can generate as many human soldiers as they want.
Unlikely, I predict that by the end of this century, the majority of medical research will be machine learning based. Watson already out-diagnoses doctors. Computers have no bias and take only raw data into their neural networks, they can also experience and process and entire patient case nearly instantly.
Sure, but I think people would prefer to be dealt with by humans rather than robots in matters such as palliative care, or abuse.
Doing it just to make it interesting doesn't really jive, it needs to be critical to the plot in some way, more than just for a moral reason, because there would still be morals in this world.
I disagree. Current humans might. Everything that happened before you were born is natural. Things invented during your early life are new and exciting. Things invented after that are unnatural. That's how every single human who has ever lived thought about the world, future humans will be no different. You will be uncomfortable getting a diagnosis from a machine, people born in 2020 will not. Same reason old people will stand in line for 20 minutes at Walmart while I use the available self checkout.
"I better take the robot doctor. The fallible human one is too risky for my taste. I'm not into all this 'alternative natural' healing stuff." - people in 2050, probably
What do you think would be a good name for artificial humans are born from tubes? They can't be call clones because clones are look a likes. And Replicants belong to Blade Runner.
In what way are these humans artificial? Is it just that they grow in artificial wombs? If that's the norm, they probably won't call them anything, they'll probably call those born the natural way something different. We don't call humans who are born using modern technology anything different than we call humans from ancient Greece who didn't have ultrasounds, cesareans, drugs, monitors... That'd be as unnatural to them as an artificial womb would be to us.
There's no denying that technological progress drives behavioural change, but hard-wired faculties are less malleable. Emotions, empathy etc. are unlikely to dissipate in the next few generations. In a field such as palliative care, which requires a higher degree of emotional intelligence than buying groceries, humans will remain in demand - at least until AI learns EI.
Yes, they are born in artificial wombs or test tubes. They are also good looking, healthy, and they are stronger than the natural humans.
