作者以“后代会觉得哪件日常事最不道德”为引子，认为对动物的利用（吃肉与动物实验）很可能像今日回看种族隔离与奴隶制度一样令人震惊；科技的关键作用不只在于致富、健康与安全，更在于扩张人的道德视野，但前提是社会愿意用它来变得更好。

家电价格下降让洗衣机、烘干机等更普及，研究指出女性家务时间因此下降、劳动参与提高；但历史也显示技术常被低估使用：当设备普及后，清洁标准上升抵消了本可更大的家务减量，呈现“效率提升→期望上调→净改善有限”的趋势。

在肉食上，道德主张难以战胜口味与成本：畜牧业约占全球温室气体排放的11%至20%，但替代肉仍受价格较高与“超加工、不健康”观感影响而难以大众化。药物研发方面，动物安全性与有效性测试被监管机构要求多年，企业因不确定性而保守；Javelin Biotech等用含人类细胞的晶片先在“动物数据本就弱”的领域取得优势，目标最终商品化并全面替代。培养肉自2013年起募资逾31亿美元，显示动能在增，但仍属早期。

The essay argues that technology can expand our moral universe, but only if society chooses to use it that way. Using a first-date question about what future generations will find shocking, the author highlights animal exploitation—especially animal testing and meat consumption—as a likely candidate, analogous to how we now judge segregation and slavery.

It cites evidence that falling prices and wider adoption of household appliances (washers and dryers) reduced time spent on housework and helped women enter the workforce, enabling broader equality. Yet the same episode shows underuse of technological potential: as tools spread, cleanliness expectations rose, offsetting what could have been larger net reductions in labor.

On meat, moral appeals compete poorly with incentives: animal agriculture is estimated at 11–20% of greenhouse-gas emissions, while plant-based alternatives have struggled due to higher prices and perceptions of being ultra-processed. In drug development, regulators have required animal safety and efficacy testing for decades, making firms risk-averse amid uncertainty; “organ-on-chip” approaches aim to outperform animals where animal data is least informative and then scale toward replacement. Cultivated-meat companies have raised over $3.1B since 2013, signaling momentum but an early-stage transition.