So there's a page on the wiki for "uplifted animals," which I gather to be animals that have been genetically engineered for human-like intelligence and the capacity to participate in human society. However, I think this is one concept for the future that doesn't belong in the Second Renaissance timeline. Not because I think it's impossible (I don't), and not because I think it's a "crime against nature" or anything like that (I don't), but because it's a lot more complicated than it's made out to be, and would ultimately cause more problems than it would solve.
Let's talk about what uplift actually entails, for a moment. At its most basic, it would involve genetically engineering an animal to possess higher intelligence than it naturally does. But that's where it stops being simple, because "intelligence" can mean a lot of different things. Take dolphins, for example. They're unquestionably smart-- they probably rival chimpanzees as the smartest mammals other than humans-- but they also have some habits that, if viewed through a human lens, would be downright disturbing. If you're a male dolphin, it's normal to kill a female's babies and force her to have sex with you. a dolphin genetically engineered for human-like intelligence would not act like a human and have human-like values. It would do the things a dolphin does, with all that implies.
Consider, too, the fact that new endeavors in science rarely get it right on the first try. Suppose we try to uplift chimps, dolphins, or crows, and end up with a hundred "failed" attempts before finally getting one that works. Most of those failures would involve suffering and early death. And considering that the values of post-naturalism mentioned on this very wiki involve working towards a lack of suffering, doing so seems quite counterproductive. Is it really worth it to sacrifice dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of intelligent lives, none of whom will ever know the freedom an intelligent being deserves, just for the sake of possibly creating a successful uplifted animal?
Finally, there's the ethical side of things. A lot of proponents of uplift see it as a form of "repayment" for humanity's treatment of other species, and a way of incorporating those species into our society. I see it differently. Uplift, when you boil it down, is essentially a species-based form of cultural imperialism, turning other species into more of ourselves. The arguments I hear from uplift proponents echo those of racist missionaries who insist other cultures must be converted to Christianity. "Their lives would be better, if only they were more like us."