Ethics, for Aristotle, has the purpose of establishing what is the end that man, according to his nature, must attain, and also from what source his happiness comes.In purely secular terms it's difficult to top that.The end of man, as for every being, according to the doctrine established in metaphysics, is the realization of the form, the attainment of the perfection due to his nature.
Now man is a rational animal, and hence his end will be the attainment of wisdom. The actions which bring one to the realization of this perfection of living according to reason are called virtues. Virtue, for Aristotle, is not the end, but the means to attain perfection, and consists in a conscious action fulfilled according to reason.
The parameters of wisdom are what we're discussing here, in one form or another. Is it wisdom to denegrate (read dehumanize) some classes of individual human beings in order to 'adjust' the physical and mental status of another chosen class or classes? It is not unwise to research the mechanics of the mechanism, to achieve greater understanding of how the mechanism functions. Even to improve on the functioning is not unwise. The measure of wisdom in these fields under discussion ought be calculated according to the means by which this knowledge is accomplished, in additrion to calculating according to the desired results. If we achieve greater knowledge by cannibalizing the lesser/younger, have we taken a wise path based on our 'rational' status, our greater awareness? I think not.