Dear Dominico,
Your essay had a nice poetic presentation of many tantalizingly interesting ideas, and I appreciate the risk you took in choosing that avenue. However, I don't think that poetic imagery is the best way to steer humanity, mostly because it can be misinterpreted.
You wrote:
"How you include in genetic, and the brain, of a person the concept of good and evil? As a human race we are able to develop ethical behavior because the oppression of other individuals (the absence of sociality) led to the extinction of individuals that are not suitable for socializing."
There is no question that deciding good and evil is critical in knowing which direction to steer humanity. It seems that you're saying that evolution made us ethical. Looking around at the state of the world today (crime, suicide, injustice and violence everywhere, war), I'd say that evolution has done a very bad job of it. How do you propose to fix this? It doesn't appear that more genetic algorithms will do the job.
You also wrote: "millions of years of evolution has led to nearly perfect chemical structures capable of absorbing light, unreachable power to build muscles,"
Any hydraulic system is *much* more powerful (per kg. or any other metric) than human or animal muscles. Photosynthesis does not capture the entire spectrum, so we can say with certainty that it is not perfect; given other issues, it is only 3-6% efficient. We can build multi-layer photovoltaic systems that are more efficient than that now; we just can't do it as cheaply as growing crabgrass. Yet. :-)
While parallel experiments are great for using genetic algorithms to search solution spaces (which is why Mother Nature did it that way), human understanding and gestalt reasoning gets us to places that Mother Nature can never reach (e.g. macro-sized wheels, interstellar aircraft, lasers, electronics, etc.)
