Hal Friedman wrote:
> I don't see anything monstrous at all about growing an artificial heart.
The procedure does not
> involve the destruction of any other life. Is this really any more "unnatural" than devising vaccines
> and other medicines that deny the "right" of naturally-created pathogens to infect and destroy a body
> and so let "nature take its course"? Perhaps your disdain for this procedure is related to your (or
> anyone close to you) not having any heart trouble. I don't think you'd be this philosophical
> otherwise.
> involve the destruction of any other life. Is this really any more "unnatural" than devising vaccines
> and other medicines that deny the "right" of naturally-created pathogens to infect and destroy a body
> and so let "nature take its course"? Perhaps your disdain for this procedure is related to your (or
> anyone close to you) not having any heart trouble. I don't think you'd be this philosophical
> otherwise.
1. My distain has naught to do with monstrousness. (Find the lyrics to "Look out there's a monster coming" and you'll better understand)
2. My distain has to do not with what is possible.
3. My distain has to do with WHY BOTHER, there are already too many people, why are we so keen on extending life beyond some "natural" limit, for what purpose, what is the goal?
Hal, for me life has no goal or purpose or mission. If I had heart trouble, I'd lump it.
Life is chemistry. When chemistry fails we die. Fairly simple. Also, humanity evolved to survive about 40 years. Anything over 40 is bonus time. Teeth don't last that long even, if you don't have modern cooking techniques for one thing...so, once again, we use our technology (culture) to circumvent "natural limits" via regrowing a new heart for someone...
>
> From Hal who says Luddites wouldn't use artificial birth control either.
> From Hal who says Luddites wouldn't use artificial birth control either.
Artificial Birth control was around long before Luddites, so they would have certainly used if they so chose! (Condoms have been around since Egyptian built pyramids!!)
JIM SAYS:
Good points. Since we routinely perform "unnatural" acts in order to have many of our modern and not-so-modern comforts, perhaps
the quality of them shouldn't be always called into question, but rather the quantity, and the circumstances. Creating an
artificial heart for an infant might at least give that person their "fair share" of life.
the quality of them shouldn't be always called into question, but rather the quantity, and the circumstances. Creating an
artificial heart for an infant might at least give that person their "fair share" of life.
(HUH? Fair Share? Hey, lucky to have been born at all, most fetus' are self aborting.)
On the other hand, expending valuable
resources to make life-extenders for people past a certain age could be seen as a misappropriation in our increasingly difficult
world.
resources to make life-extenders for people past a certain age could be seen as a misappropriation in our increasingly difficult
world.
THIS IS MY DISTAIN. FOR THOSE WHO THINK WE ARE IN A WORLD OF UNLIMITED RESOURCES, SO THAT EVERYTHING INCLUDING THE PLANET CAN BE SACRIFICED IN THE NAME OF EXTENSION OF human LIFE.
Hard choices need to be made, resources allocated correctly, and NOW if humanity expects to survive beyond 2150 BCE.
Your optimism Hal is only matched by Jim's diplomacy!
Thanks to both of your comments. The world is being destroyed, we continue to ignore it.
(Jim says:) But such discipline, for fairness, should go hand in hand with extremely disciplined breeding.
(Frish: Yeah, Like NONE)
