How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Gene Therapy --> Cloning   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Gene Therapy --> Cloning

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


50 posted 04-13-2004 01:06 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Humans only control more because they are not equipped with the instincts to control less.
As we are only lesser able to do things by instinct we are greater bound to control, to make up for all we can't do instinctually.

[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-13-2004 02:19 AM).]

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


51 posted 04-13-2004 01:16 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

"We can't fight, we can't run, and we're too dang naked to hide very well. "

If this is so?

We all sure waste a lot of time trying...



and it's very bad news for someone with an adrenal malfunction.

Severn
Member Rara Avis
since 07-17-99
Posts 8273


52 posted 04-13-2004 07:07 AM       View Profile for Severn   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Severn

quote:
Humans only control more because they are not equipped with the instincts to control less.
As we are only lesser able to do things by instinct we are greater bound to control, to make up for all we can't do instinctually.


What? Using a binary opposition like this one won't wrap things up all neat and tidy like you want them to be Essy. It's already been pointed out that control and instinct aren't mutually exclusive.

Think apes and sticks for tools. Instinct and control over an environment working rather nicely I think.

I'm thinking of those poor, manipulated monkeys from the sixties (I think) who were offered the choice of two surrogate mothers - a cloth monkey, or a wire monkey with food.

The instinct for comfort overrode the instinct for food - most chose the cloth mothers to cling to. Wouldn't you think that a 'lesser' being such as a monkey would obey its survival instinct first and foremost?

Nature works through science, Essorant. Go study mushrooms.   I'm sorry, but it does. For every natural process there is a scientific explanation. Perhaps the key is choice.

We have the ability to think outside our instinct (yes, we have as much instinct as other creatures)...we also have the ability to choose.

Simplified examples: We have chosen the convenience of agricultural harvesting over the hunter-gathering lifestyle. More and more we are chosing the convenience of cities over a rural\feudal lifestyle. We find pollution in cities - but the convenience that vehicles offer is more important etc etc.

It comes down to choice. I believe we will clone humans one day. Of course we will. If not in our generation, then the next, or the next. It will happen. How many scientific possibilities have we abandoned?

There are real advantages, such as the ones that have already been mentioned. However, as with most things there are cons to the pros.

I consider choosing a baby based on the way that child might look a shallow con. But it's a choice that we might make...alongside the choice to have children without genetic diseases...alongside the benefits that stem cell research produces...

That seems logical.

(And Raph - I can hear you and your indignant huffing. Hahaha ~poke~ Settle down man. I'm sure there are patches of dry ground amongst all that snow. Just like ~gasp~ there are phones where I live! And even tv!)

K
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


53 posted 04-13-2004 08:24 AM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

Yes I hear New Zealand also has fancy foods now, like salmon and crackers. lol
Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


54 posted 04-13-2004 02:43 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

quote:
I consider choosing a baby based on the way that child might look a shallow con. But it's a choice that we might make...alongside the choice to have children without genetic diseases...alongside the benefits that stem cell research produces...
Ever seen the movie Gattaca, k? This statement immediately brought that to mind. As you said there would be cons... i wonder at the likelihood of a Gattacan society.
Severn
Member Rara Avis
since 07-17-99
Posts 8273


55 posted 04-13-2004 03:26 PM       View Profile for Severn   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Severn

Raph - ROTF! Omg I'd forgotten about that...oh the humiliation...

Well C I actually thought of mentioning Gattaca and er..couldn't remember the name of the movie heh so decided to forgo a long explanation of 'have you seen the movie where ____ happens?' Despite its hollywoodism - it's still a scary concept...

K

Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


56 posted 04-13-2004 03:41 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

K I remember everything

As for the Gattacan society I agree, isn't this part of the reason we viewed Hitler as a monster? His ideal and quest for the 'perfect' Aryan Man?
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


57 posted 04-13-2004 07:52 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

The Gattaca problem, as I see it, isn't really one of genetic engineering as a beast -- it is the application of it as a tool to discriminate that is the problem.

Same thing with Hitler -- his goal was to be superior (which he thought the Aryans were already).  The monstrous experiments he had conducted on living human subjects were the really ghastly part.
Aenimal
Member Rara Avis
since 11-18-2002
Posts 7451
the ass-end of space


58 posted 04-13-2004 11:10 PM       View Profile for Aenimal   Email Aenimal   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Aenimal

I think it was all ghastly, the man literally drew plans for the perfect Aryan, from facial features to hair colour.

I understand you're point, I simply don't think the human race capable of the kind of restraint this sort of technology/science should be handled with.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


59 posted 04-17-2004 03:14 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Conclusion:

For every excellence of increased wit and control in the human, there is an excellence of increased features and instinct in an animal:

Bird's wings and feathers  <=>  Human's aircrafts (airplanes, etc)

Fish's gills and fins  <=>  Human's watercrafts (ships, etc,)

Horse's speeds and force <=>  Human's landcrafts (wagons, etc)

Therefore, animals make up for a lack of insight or increased wit, with instinct; and humans make up for a lack of instinct, or increased instinct, with insight.  The only thing, is that humans crafts are not already made.  Metals do not naturally occur as machines, or jewellery, etc, etc. and they don't evolve as those on their own. Therefore Human's need to observe the rest of the natural world, and learn from what does best, so they may do better, and better meet its instinct, with adequate insight.  

In other words, humans need to do better because they do not best.

[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-17-2004 03:55 PM).]

Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


60 posted 04-17-2004 03:50 PM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

Ess, you never fail to astound me.

Think of a beaver's dam... the dam is not a natural extension of pre-existing formations, but rather a made construction formed from intent. That said beaver is responding out of instinct doesn't promote your analogy of metal to machine, but rather contradicts it.

As Ron said, humans do have and respond from instinct. Like the beaver, however, we expand upon that past survival to develop things that will further make us comfortable or happy or productive... on and on. Reverting back to base instinct would convert our world not to the Edenistic ideal you seem to be suggesting, but rather a chaotic mass of individuals and packs vying for survival... much like the animal world you speak of. Not much of an incentive (not to mention, I'd hate to live without access to a hot shower).

LR - I agree with you completely. Genetic engineering isn't a beast. Neither is nuclear engineering, or gunpowder, or any other idea. It is, as you say, the use of such tools that determines the good or evil. I guess what it comes down to is the old Spock theory: "The good of the many outweight the needs of the few." That it has the potential to do great good for many, while possibly damaging a few (I just have a hard time seeing a Gattacan society coming into being... diversity is possibly one of the greatest propellants for scientific reasearch/discovery) suggests to me that it should be utilized. As someone (I think it was Jim, but am too lazy to go back and look to confirm, lol) it is GOING to happen. Whether now or later, we will see. The research is already being done, with funding not being a problem from what I've been able to learn... who knows, maybe it'll lead to our next problem... dramatically increased lifespans.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


61 posted 04-17-2004 04:50 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
Bird's wings and feathers  <=>  Human's aircrafts (airplanes, etc)

Fish's gills and fins  <=>  Human's watercrafts (ships, etc,)

Horse's speeds and force <=>  Human's landcrafts (wagons, etc)


If the ability to adapt to different environments is any sign of superiority, then this is a good example of human superiority. Fish have a hard time flying, horses don't breath very well underwater, and birds, well, they don't run very fast unless they lose the ability to fly. We can do all these things.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


62 posted 04-18-2004 02:47 AM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Christopher,
That is a good example.  I'm not trying to suggest an animal like the beaver has no control over his enviroment.  But I believe he has more instinctual "flow" and more features that come with needing to behave in that; and remaining fairly stationary in a niche.  He doesn't need to make a machine to do what he does.  He doesn't need to do better: that is because he is already doing best what he ought to.  He doesn't need more control because he is has it all in what he has already.


Brad,

But all those creatures do better than the human at doing what they need in their specific enviroments.  Fish swim better than humans.  Birds fly better than human's in airplanes. Horse's run swiftlier than human's in vehicles.  For all man's ability to adapt to different enviroments he still can't do anything as well as those that do it all the time in that same one.  
He can only always do better in nature; that is because he can never do best.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


63 posted 04-18-2004 03:19 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

No, Essorant, that is simply untrue. By any standard other than the idea that birds, fish, and horses are the standard, we do better in all areas. Hell, we've even left the planet.

But you haven't realized the not so subtle point I was making, you don't compare fish to horses, horses to birds, or fish to birds.

The only comparison you made was to us.
Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


64 posted 04-18-2004 01:34 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

My point was that each does best in his own enviroment.  Each does as well here as the other  does there.  
But human is basically tainted a bit from everywhere it seems, therefore he he less adapted to any specific "spheres" as any specific animals are.  There is nothing wrong with that.  But he can  even less adapt to things natural and evolutionary on their own when he diminishes those and puts things there that are based on his own plan that needs to be more controlled and forced.  The more control and force man puts on the world, the more the natural enviroments are reduced, and the more the animals therewith are reduced as well.  The  "spontanous" world is decreased, therefore all worldly things become more dependant on human force, as well as human force may do.  But human force, as we see, is not especially attuned  to any specific enviroment.  Human force, is often only as good as human insight.  But even human insight is not as faithful as human instinct; and now we return to how well humans adapt: not as well advancedly for any specific nooks of nature as specific animals that abide in those nooks most thoroughly and fixedly.
What are human choices being moved by?  What are we trying to do?  The world looks more like a city every age, so are other animals supposed to somehow remove themselves from the spheres they adapt to best to take residence in the city?  No, they don't and they can't.  They die.  
The main interests are not in the whole world, they are in the human world.  
But the human world will collapse if the natural world decreases because there is no thing that was artificially reared, but it branches originally from the bosom of the natural world.  Most of all it is not that complex, if you look at it like a tree.  A tree needs it roots.  


[This message has been edited by Essorant (04-18-2004 03:30 PM).]

Essorant
Member Elite
since 08-10-2002
Posts 4689
Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada


65 posted 04-18-2004 04:46 PM       View Profile for Essorant   Email Essorant   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Essorant's Home Page   View IP for Essorant

Human ways become savage of nature with too little structure,  they also become savage of structure, with too little nature.  
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


66 posted 04-18-2004 08:55 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

But, Essorant, you're under the illusion that Nature is somehow nice. It's not.

Actually, you're under two illusions:

1. Nature is nice. Spontaneously, nice things happen.

2. We aren't a part of nature.

We are still the only species that has brought another species back from the brink of extinction.  We are not the only species to bring another species to extinction.

[This message has been edited by Brad (04-19-2004 04:09 AM).]

Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


67 posted 04-19-2004 12:38 AM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

Ess, you confound me sometimes.
Skyfyre
Senior Member
since 08-15-99
Posts 1966
Sitting in Michael's Lap


68 posted 04-20-2004 12:55 AM       View Profile for Skyfyre   Email Skyfyre   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Skyfyre

Mankind's greatest asset is not how he adapts to his environment ... but how he is intelligent enough to adapt his environment to himself.

That is what sets us apart from the animals.  Beavers build dams ... but they do not review them with peers, discussing the merits and weaknesses of this or that method of their construction, nor postulate on ways to improve them by altering the way in which they are made.  It is, as as been said, instinct ... which is slow to change, doing so usually only in response to some drastic, unavoidable occurance in the ecosystem which threatens the survival of the species (or gives a member of the species with a certain adaptive mutation a significant edge over others of its kind).

Instinct might drive a human to build a house -- a shelter to protect him from the weather.  It would not, however, lead him to build a library.  Or a school, or a concert hall, or a baseball stadium ... surely these buildings have their own merits whether their origins were "natural" (read: instinctual) or not?

Humans don't need this sort of impetus to affect changes in their environment.  They choose to change their environment because it is safer, more comfortable, more durable, or simply more pleasing to them.

The end-product of human evolution may well be the absence of what we call 'instinct,' as it will no longer be necessary in such a highly developed intelligence.  We already practice a great deal of control over these basic drives, as they often urge behaviours which are discouraged in civilized society. Wouldn't the next logical step on the ladder be to eliminate them entirely?

Reverting back to a primitive state is simply not an option for the human species; not only does it run contrary to our nature (there's a paradox for you!) but it would doom a good many of our number to death as thei lives are maintained by the evils of modern medicine and technology.

Environmentalism, like all other vices, is best taken in moderation.     
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Gene Therapy --> Cloning   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors