Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Debate; A place to debate anything
Topic Started: Aug 4 2009, 10:45 PM (1,054 Views)
redmer

ok....maybe debate thread wasn't the best idea....I'm sorry for what I said...I'll just not post anymore...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

sorry I wasn't that agressive was I? :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darkom
Member Avatar

No, Redmer, this is how some of us have a good time. We just love to argue.

Anyway, Evil, that means that eventually the poor would die out and all humans would just naturally look like that. Eventually, everyone will look the same. What you're saying would be a few generations of strife compared to the hundreds of generations of zero segregation, racism, etc. later. Long term goals here :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

very O.o I don't like the sound of the poor dying out here are we talking euthanasia :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darkom
Member Avatar

They deserve it :P

But really, they don't literally die. There are just fewer poor people because the rich can have as many perfect babies as they want. They can be geniuses, super athletes, politicians, and movie stars all at the same time. And when no one is stupid, obese, socially awkward, etc. and there is no racism, discrimination, etc., is that not a utopia?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

nearly, there is still the whole food problem, the only way humanity is going to acchieve true utopia would be off of the backs of robots - it ain't utopia till you no longer have to worry about money, work or anything really
Edited by Evil_pigeon, Aug 6 2009, 07:42 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darkom
Member Avatar

1. Food- With all the new intelligence, new farming machines and techniques would be a breeze. Robots wouldn't be far off. Also, we could easily manipulate our bodies to require less food to function, with both genetics and bio-robotics. We would all be physically fit cyborgs 8I
2. Money, Work, and anything really- Once again, no one needs to worry about exercising, school could be covered in five years instead of the current system where it is up to 21 years for a doctor going through all of college and med school, or social events. No one would have to do anything they don't want to. Of course, government would have to catch up, but there would eventually be much less civil unrest (crime).

When everyone is perfect, the world will quickly follow.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

I'd like t think so :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Half Tooth
Member Avatar

Yes, deabtes are a good idea. Because you can improve your argument/debating skills at the same time as having a discussion which you don't often get the cnace to do in every day life, well if I was to walk up to my friends and ask them what they thought about genetic engineering they'd lookat me like O_o wtf?!
It's good to have people to debate things with :D

Also, I know that Nature isn't a sentient being in itself. What I meant was, mass extinction isn't exactlt difficult for it to acheive, and humans are pushing on those bounderies enough at the moment.

As for making other species extinct, I have come to the conclusion that humans are pretty useless at most things, we can't swim or fly we don't have claws we can't climb particularly well without equiptment, we don't have any natural armour (any more than skin I mean) and for most people hair only grows on in two areas, only giving two area's protection. So in respect to animals, humans are naturally useless at most things. We do however have far more intelligence than most animals, and I like the say although I can't remember where it came from

"With great knowledge comes great responsibility"

I think humans fall into this category. We can't do much without some sort of help other than our bodies, but we do have the ability to learn so much, and to know so many things and we are abusing it at the moment. It will all fall back on us at some point, we're shooting ourselves in the foot as it were.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

I don't think it's as simple as that, alot of technologies are double edged, we can't continue to grow and develop as a species without creating increasingly more dangerous pitfalls. We're always going to abuse technology for futile purposes like warfare and it won't ever stop but I have enough faith in the species to believe that we have the sense not to do anything that would end the species.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darkom
Member Avatar

I believe the source you are thinking of is Spiderman :P

What would you rather have us do? Because with enlightenment also comes curiosity and desire to better ourselves. Will you deny these people satiation of these things simply because if they screw up they could create some kind of Prototype style super disease?

And yeah, no matter what happens, we'll find a way to survive. Unfortunately :\
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Half Tooth
Member Avatar

I think that maybe one day we will learn from everything we've done and I guess we have to make a mistake in order to learn from it, but I still think a lot of things that we are curious about should not be done just because we are curious about them.
I've always liked the idea of having miniture animals, like if they were all scaled down so that a lion from tail to nose was the length of your hand. That kind of scale, I think it would be so fun to have miniture pets, you'd be able to study wildlife as well but in miniture. But if someone was so say they had found a way to accomplish something like that, I would still do everything I could to disuede them and disagree with them.
I guess my main morals come from mther nature made things a certain way for a reason. And just for the record I am not referring to mother nature as a sentient being as such. I just mean nature is a delicate balance and tipping it and interferring with it is wrong on most occasions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

Nature has no reason, the way things are currently is absolute fluke, that is how natural selection works. If it is possible to improve or change the purpose of something through manipulation then what is wrong with that?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Half Tooth
Member Avatar

It's not our decision to make I guess.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Evil_pigeon
Member Avatar

How so? You say you're okay with abortion and there isn't much difference morally for genetic modifications as far as I can see except that, instead of killing off that balls of cells you're adapting and improving it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darkom
Member Avatar

It's only our decision so far. No other creature makes decisions except whether they should eat their own vomit or not. Until we are not the only sentient creatures on the planet, every decision is ours to make. Natural selection and evolution more than likely left us with some crappy animals compared to how they could be. Nature could probably be twenty times better than it is now. Heck, better is subjective mostly to how it compares to previous systems.

Well, humans are better than monkeys, monkeys are better than dinosaurs, dinosaurs are better than sea creatures, sea creatures are better than single cell organisms and so on. I propose the world was a better place before life existed on it, can I not also say that life will be better after we mess with genetics? If cavemen never decided to rub rocks against each other to see what happened, would we have fire? Curiosity is the gateway to development, and if we aren't creating something new, then what are we doing on this planet?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Half Tooth
Member Avatar

I don't really know to be honest but I'm quite enjoying this debate because it's making me think about all these things all over again.

And bringing up aborotion again, I think it is wrong, but when it's the lesser of 2 evils it's the better route to take.
And the same sort of things with humans. I think curiosity is a good thing, we can explore and learn and develop as you said. But.. well... I'm struggling to explain.. in my head I'm still trying to find where to put that line between right and wrong I guess is the best way of putting it.
I guess what I'm trying to say is exploring is one thing and tampering with nature is another. Genetically modifying anything is bad really, because it makes it no longer natural. seeing if you can build a rocket that takes you to the moon is ok.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Atmoran

Just going to touch on some of the subjects here. This is fun.


Pets: Dogs are much better pets. Cats are boring. What, you just expect me to pet you all day? Screw you.

Evolution: Evolution is real. To say otherwise is to ignore the logical conclusion of genetics. The real question is whether or not scientific theories on the history of evolution are true. I say "Probably."

Abortion: It's the killing of a baby. If you're willing to provide proof that there is absolutely no brain activity going on at the time of abortion (it varies), I'm willing to accept it.

Cheating: Not immoral, but if you love someone and you know cheating on them would hurt them, you shouldn't cheat on them. Many will, because it's often a mistake, but to do it with no guilt probably means you don't love whoever you cheated on.

Pre-marital sex: Absolutely.

Healthcare: If the people of the US want socialized healthcare they can go the Constitutional route and push for healthcare in their state. California is a perfect candidate. The Federal system hurts them the most, they'd benefit more out of a state-run system. My state (NM) on the other hand would benefit more out of a Federal system, considering that for every dollar we pay in Federal taxes we get two dollars back.

Global Warming: Absolute LACK of science. It's unreal how the scientific community jumped on this bandwagon. Absolutely mind-boggling. 1: Provide prove that it's happening. 2: Provide proof that we are a cause or a catalyst. 3: Prove that it's bad for us as a country. 4: Find a solution. 5: Prove that the solution is going to cause less harm than would be caused by not acting.

Genetic Modification: In general I put this in the same basket as circumcision. Wrong if the purpose is anything other than to fix some genetic disease or something similar. No changing hair color or anything like that, I would'nt even accept doing it to make the baby naturally more intelligent or physically fit. As for animals and plants, modify away, I don't care.

Edited by Atmoran, Aug 8 2009, 12:51 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Darkom
Member Avatar

Natural is better? Houses, computers, televisions, etc. aren't natural, but we like them anyway. And there is no line between good and evil, right or wrong. Never was.

What's wrong with killing babies?

I don't care as much about government issues.

Global Warming- Consider this, if energy is not created or destroyed, and we are all in agreement the sun provides heat for the Earth, then where does all the energy transferred to the world go? They might be exaggerating it a little, but it is undoubtedly happening to an extent. Greenhouse gasses are real, though they might not be as bad as they think. Because the world will be hotter and food can't grow very well. Zero solution, especially if it is greenhouse gasses. That's equivelant to saying that the sun won't run out of energy because we can't stop it.

Skirting around the topic of circumcision, could you please rebuttle some of the reasons I gave above so I don't repeat myself. I'm not entirely certain of your stance on this, so I can't really debate it well.

Oh, and welcome to our forum :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Atmoran

You don't think there's anything wrong with killing babies? Seems self-evident to me.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying about global warming, but until it's proven the act of trying to save the world from global warming would cause less harm than not acting at all, I'm content. I certainly don't want us signing any kind of Kyoto. Certain, terrible damage to our economy for the purpose of saving the world from something immeasurable. We haven't the slightest clue what kind of effect we're having on our environment.

I think tampering with your child's genetics before they're born for any purpose other than to cure a genetic disease is a gross overstepping of what I believe to be proper parental bounds. Again, it just seems self-evident.

EDIT:

While we're at it I'd like to bring another subject to the front: central banking. I believe the US should either abolish the central banking system and instead have private banks print money but only when they have sufficient gold backing, or adopt a European banking strategy in which the focus of the central bank isn't growth, but stable value of the currency.
Edited by Atmoran, Aug 9 2009, 01:08 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Community Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply