# Should we create new intelligent beings?

_Mykyta Zagamula; edited with AI assistance · updated 2026-09-13_

_Question · State: Open · https://synchronism.top/en/questions/creating-minds/_

Imagine that bringing back a Neanderthal has become possible and sufficiently safe. Is it worth creating a being who may become the only representative of their species? Technical feasibility is assumed here in order to examine separately the duties of the creators and the conditions of the future life.

## What we know

- The ethics of bringing future people into existence has developed arguments about wellbeing, non-identity and responsibility for the conditions of their lives.
- The impossibility of obtaining consent from a being that does not yet exist applies to ordinary birth as well. Its significance requires a further argument.
- Assessing the safety of creation and assessing the future life are different questions: a successful procedure does not guarantee good conditions of existence.

## What we do not know

- Which conditions of wellbeing and social environment we are obliged to secure for a being created deliberately.
- Whether the absence of others of one’s kind carries independent moral weight.
- Who should represent the interests of the future being while the decision is taken.
- Which conclusions from the biological scenario apply to possible artificial bearers of experience.

## Our position

The answer is still taking shape. Further arguments and sources should help ground it.

## Why this matters to synchronism

The scenario joins a biological capability, knowledge about a being’s needs, and institutional responsibility. It lets the adequacy of existing ethical principles be tested and specific unknowns be identified; the age of a principle does not determine its adequacy.

## Sources

- Derek Parfit. Reasons and Persons (1984) — the chapter on non-identity and the ethics of bringing beings into existence
- Jonathan Glover. Choosing Children (2006) — on design decisions about future people

## What is missing here

- **Argument** (Philosopher) — Compare two arguments for or against creating a being who will have no others of their kind. State whether they rest on wellbeing, rights or some other ground.
- **Question** (Generalist) — Propose one question about the procedure for representing the future being’s interests, and explain which decision depends on it.
- **Source** (Technical reader) — Point us to one work on duties towards deliberately created beings, and the relevant argument from it.
## Next

- Question: Can an AI have moral standing? — https://synchronism.top/en/questions/ai-moral-status/
- Question: When does a moral category stop working? — https://synchronism.top/en/questions/moral-categories/
- Case: The age of our moral vocabulary — https://synchronism.top/en/research/moral-vocabulary-age/
- Concept: Moral circle expansion — https://synchronism.top/en/glossary/moral-circle/
- Concept: Category decomposition — https://synchronism.top/en/glossary/decomposition/

---
Canonical page: https://synchronism.top/en/questions/creating-minds/
Take part: https://synchronism.top/en/work/