"I always get pissed off when people bring up Frankenstein -- they're not cautioning against reckless ambition, they're more likely using it as a sledgehammer against their "scientist enemies" -- as if using a work of fiction convinces anyone but the weak minded. If they wanted to illustrate hubris, there exists a vast body to select from. Only reason I might see one may select "Frankenstein" in a political context is to single out science, as if a process is responsible for human fallibility."
Nah. It stands. The issue of ethics is relevant-and it has been well raised by philosophers. Unless you want to make the argument that might is right (and I know there are those who will, convincingly-for a time), we have zero right to be doing that shit to other beings. Frankenstein, Food of the Gods, Equilibrium, whatever, the issue remains up front: Just because we CAN do something does not indicate obligation.
Nah. It stands. The issue of ethics is relevant-and it has been well raised by philosophers. Unless you want to make the argument that might is right (and I know there are those who will, convincingly-for a time), we have zero right to be doing that shit to other beings. Frankenstein, Food of the Gods, Equilibrium, whatever, the issue remains up front: Just because we CAN do something does not indicate obligation.
Trying to update my sig ...
