I didn't know whether to put this in the philosophy section or here. Watch this video and let's have your thoughts, this is the hottest topic in the ethics of science.
http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDire...vV7v2XYJAI

I couldn't help but be scared at the potential we have at our disposal already.

You should be scared at the potential of artificial engineering -- ever look at a Predator drone?

I wish they would put just one wide window on the front of them so they don't look so fucking creepy. It's weird how that lack of a window can freak me out. Otherwise, I think they are actually pretty neat.

(June 19, 2011 at 7:44 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: You should be scared at the potential of artificial engineering -- ever look at a Predator drone?

I'm already scared about that. I hadn't the same awareness of the bioengineering side of things. Plus there's the whole ethical side of what you can do with animals which is hardly present in what you can do to metal.

Then you failed the exercise.

The point was to illustrate 'fear' is omnipresent when you look for reasons to 'fear' something.

Ignorance leads to fear. Fear leads to hatred. Hatred leads to the Dark side of the... oh wait, never mind that last part.

Learn. Think. Understand.

One should not 'fear' bio-engineering or even any single region of knowledge, one should be aware though of the limitations, the hubris and behaviors of the humans who practice it. To do otherwise risks following along Luddite patterns, fearful of what they do not understand while ignoring the actions of others, whom they should be wary of.

There are many things one can do with metal that is considered "unethical" -- why not take a look into the usage of any tool towards what you perceive as negative? Why not notice that there are "metal" (reassigned as "not biological") objects that can destroy great swathes of land?

All I see present here is someone being fearful. Not being understanding.

A tool is only as used by the user.

It's not unethical to make metal into a tool. If you use that for evil, then it is. How about a living being? Is it right to make that into any form we desire? My point was that metal has no 'rights' in and of itself, life does.

I didn't say I feared bioengineering, just that the possibilities it's offering are providing huge new moral questions that will have massive consequences on the future. That we hold the power to decide these things now, the responsibility to choose wisely, is a very sobering thought. Maybe sobering is a better word than scary. Does it not chill you even a little to think of what getting these things wrong will mean?

I agree we should learn all we can and not be afraid of that, all I'm saying is we shouldn't just do things because we can, we must decide some ground rules on this issue. The ethics of bioengineering is what I want to discuss.

(June 20, 2011 at 6:40 pm)BloodyHeretic Wrote: It's not unethical to make metal into a tool. If you use that for evil, then it is. How about a living being? Is it right to make that into any form we desire? My point was that metal has no 'rights' in and of itself, life does.

But life does not have endemic rights. Life is merely a collection of processes encased in some container. The lowest levels of what we consider life are merely mindless automatons, following complex algorithms and feedback systems.

We grant rights to thinking beings like ourselves, a statement of equality between similarly capable organisms. But have you considered what a right truly is?

A worry I might have, that many have, is the possibility for humans to become callous and lack empathy, turning their very tools to destructive and monstrous purposes. Between modifying a thinking being into a slave organism or incinerating alive another thinking being, there is little difference when it comes to man's inhumanity to man.

(June 20, 2011 at 6:40 pm)BloodyHeretic Wrote: I didn't say I feared bioengineering, just that the possibilities it's offering are providing huge new moral questions that will have massive consequences on the future. That we hold the power to decide these things now, the responsibility to choose wisely, is a very sobering thought. Maybe sobering is a better word than scary. Does it not chill you even a little to think of what getting these things wrong will mean?

Things, though, do not "go wrong". Only the men who use them are astray. And yes, it chills me, every time I witness the inhumanity of humans.

I do not think that we have the scope of understanding to modify ourselves without some major repercussions. There are already so many problems caused by the introduction of non-indigenous species to areas in which they do not belong but in which they come to thrive, the results of which can be environmentally disastrous; now, we're creating animals and possibly soon humans as we see fit, but the fitness of which may have dire consequences.

I had a student these past two years, who almost certainly will end up at one of the major polytechnical schools (MIT has already expressed interest in him in his sophomore year of high school). He is completely driven by the idea that sentient robots are not only possible but probable in the next decade. He jokingly said once that his dream was to create a Skynet that actually worked. I responded by saying that the one in the Terminator films worked exceptionally well-after its own fashion.

Frankenstein is a good morality play. I don't think science can heed the warning of the liberal artists, but I hope that my children or their children will not reap the consequences of the seeds we are perhaps soon to sow.

Brave New World, anyone? Never Let Me go, perhaps? Gattacca?

It makes me shudder. I revere science, but it is at a crossroads here, I think.

Eventually in science we are going to come across discoveries which can be used to do terrible things. But on the other side of the coin they can potentially do great things.
I think bioengineering is especially relevant.
I agree with moros, and to quote a certain someone: "with great power comes great responsibility".

What comes to mind here for me is the old question, quis custodes custodiet?