|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 7:27:46 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
I am not sure what the big deal is; if humans are merely the product of the incidental modification of genetics to begin with, what's a little more tinkering going to matter?
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:01:22 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
I am not sure what the big deal is; if humans are merely the product of the incidental modification of genetics to begin with, what's a little more tinkering going to matter?
For the billionth time, 'is' does not equal 'ought'.
Similarly, just because we can do something, does not mean we should. Just because it's 'natural' for large quantities of plutonium to explode, doesn't mean that we should all be free to construct and use our own atomic bombs.
Science can help determine what is, and technology can advance what we can do. Neither of these things suggests, implies or requires that this is how the world should be, or what we should do.
That's what we have philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion for.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:12:41 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
For the billionth time, 'is' does not equal 'ought'.
Similarly, just because we can do something, does not mean we should. Just because it's 'natural' for large quantities of plutonium to explode, doesn't mean that we should all be free to construct and use our own atomic bombs.
Science can help determine what is, and technology can advance what we can do. Neither of these things suggests, implies or requires that this is how the world should be, or what we should do.
That's what we have philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion for.
You failed to explain why it would matter if we genetically modified a human.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:22:38 PM
|
|
|
Real_Solitude
Posts: 328
Joined: 5/9/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
You failed to explain why it would matter if we genetically modified a human.
I think it would have something to do with the freakish geno-babies that would be produced by this procedure.
I'm an advocate of genetic modification. However, we should not test this technology in a trial-and-error way on intelligent beings. That is unethical.
_____________________________
"Instead of feeling alone in a group its better to have real solitude all by yourself."
~Faye Valentine
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:26:09 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
I think it would have something to do with the freakish geno-babies that would be produced by this procedure.
I'm an advocate of genetic modification. However, we should not test this technology in a trial-and-error way on intelligent beings. That is unethical.
There is no scientific or naturalistic basis for such ethics.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:26:29 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
For the billionth time, 'is' does not equal 'ought'.
Similarly, just because we can do something, does not mean we should. Just because it's 'natural' for large quantities of plutonium to explode, doesn't mean that we should all be free to construct and use our own atomic bombs.
Science can help determine what is, and technology can advance what we can do. Neither of these things suggests, implies or requires that this is how the world should be, or what we should do.
That's what we have philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion for.
You failed to explain why it would matter if we genetically modified a human.
I wasn't putting forth that claim.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:28:10 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
There is no scientific or naturalistic basis for such ethics.
Duh.
quote:
That's what we have philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion for.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 8:29:39 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Duh.
That isn't an argument, unless you are claiming philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion based on objective truth.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 9:07:16 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3170
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I think it would have something to do with the freakish geno-babies that would be produced by this procedure. Almost all mutations produce "freakish babies", R_S. Why get sqeamish over the putative mechanism of common descent?
quote:
However, we should not test this technology in a trial-and-error way on intelligent beings. That is unethical. How little intelligence in a being makes geno-manipulation ethical? How would you quantitate this degree of intelligence for ethical purposes?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 11:35:35 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Duh.
That isn't an argument, unless you are claiming philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion based on objective truth.
That was not argument, it was agreement. Double-Duh.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/12/2008 11:41:48 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
That was not argument, it was agreement.
What exactly are you agreeing with?
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 11:49:02 AM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
That was not argument, it was agreement.
What exactly are you agreeing with?
Science does not produce ethics.
Science may produce data that may inform ethical decisions, but it does not itself produce an ethical system.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 11:55:28 AM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Almost all mutations produce "freakish babies", R_S.
No, they don't. Given measured rates of copying errors, every baby ever born has about 120 random mutations.
Yet most babies aren't 'freaks'.
Anti-evolutionists often claim that mutations are almost invariably harmful, but this is evidently not the case.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 12:21:14 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Science does not produce ethics.
Science may produce data that may inform ethical decisions, but it does not itself produce an ethical system.
So, then there would be no reason, from a naturalist or materialist perspective, not to conduct such experiments.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 1:14:06 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Science does not produce ethics.
Science may produce data that may inform ethical decisions, but it does not itself produce an ethical system.
So, then there would be no reason, from a naturalist or materialist perspective, not to conduct such experiments.
There is no reason, from a monarchical perspective, not to conduct such experiments. There is no reason, from a laissez-faire capitalist perspective, not to conduct such experiments. There is no reason, from a baseball perspective, not to conduct such experiments. Stop trying to use the wrong tool for the job. The rules of baseball don't tell you whether you should cheat on your spouse or not; neither do Newton's laws.
The people (law makers, scientific advisory boards, etc.) who will make the decision whether or not to allow or forbid such experiments will not themselves perform a scientific experiment to determine if the answer is yes or no. It is not a scientific decision. They will make this ethical decision based on their own ethical systems.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 1:38:07 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
There is no reason, from a monarchical perspective, not to conduct such experiments. There is no reason, from a laissez-faire capitalist perspective, not to conduct such experiments. There is no reason, from a baseball perspective, not to conduct such experiments. Stop trying to use the wrong tool for the job. The rules of baseball don't tell you whether you should cheat on your spouse or not; neither do Newton's laws.
The people (law makers, scientific advisory boards, etc.) who will make the decision whether or not to allow or forbid such experiments will not themselves perform a scientific experiment to determine if the answer is yes or no. It is not a scientific decision. They will make this ethical decision based on their own ethical systems.
So by what basis, do you think such experiments should be forbidden? (please don’t say ‘ethical’ or ‘legal’, as such a generic basis in and of itself does not forbid anything)
Please articulate a specific set of precepts that are roundly accepted by which such experiments can be restricted, and by what authority the restrictions can be imposed.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 1:50:11 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3170
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
Almost all mutations produce "freakish babies", R_S.
No, they don't. Sorry, es, here is the definition of "freak":
freak= any abnormal phenomenon or product or unusual object; anomaly; aberration.
Obviously, a mutation is a freak of nature and the resultant offspring are freakish, by definition. So, I ask you the same question since R_S hasn't answered. Why should an evolutionist be uncomfortable producing freaks of nature since that is the putative mechanism of common descent?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 2:28:01 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
quote:
Almost all mutations produce "freakish babies", R_S.
No, they don't. Sorry, es, here is the definition of "freak":
freak= any abnormal phenomenon or product or unusual object; anomaly; aberration.
Obviously, a mutation is a freak of nature and the resultant offspring are freakish, by definition.
Did you actually read my post? Everyone alive has ~100 novel mutations, not inherited from his/her parents. Therefore, by your definition we are all freaks.
quote:
Why should an evolutionist be uncomfortable producing freaks of nature since that is the putative mechanism of common descent?
Some will make a moral reflection and be uncomfortable. Others will make a moral reflection and not be uncomfortable.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 2:45:00 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
So by what basis, do you think such experiments should be forbidden? (please don’t say ‘ethical’ or ‘legal’, as such a generic basis in and of itself does not forbid anything)
I think harvesting organs from prisoners (against their will) should be forbidden. On what basis? It is part of my personal system of ethics. I think it's wrong. I don't see how I can answer your question with anything other than 'ethics'.
quote:
Please articulate a specific set of precepts that are roundly accepted by which such experiments can be restricted, and by what authority the restrictions can be imposed.
There are many accepted guidelines that govern the ethics and legality of human research. Possibly, one of them already covers the case under consideration. Possibly, two of them offer differing opinions on the situation. Possibly, none of them address it, and it will have to be addressed by committees of ethicists, scientists and politicians. The exact same kind of people who drew up those other guidelines, and following the exact same process.
Ultimately (in the US) our political representatives will probably vote whether to adopt a particular set of rules governing this kind of research. No doubt, each will make his or her own moral reflection on the issue.
How is this case any different from stem cell research, cloning, test-tube babies, or any of the other ethical quandaries that science has placed in our laps? Society debates the issue, ethics are proposed, morality is argued, laws are passed, protests are held, laws may be changed or modified.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 4:14:15 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
I think harvesting organs from prisoners (against their will) should be forbidden. On what basis? It is part of my personal system of ethics. I think it's wrong. I don't see how I can answer your question with anything other than 'ethics'.
Well, again, you 'personal' system of ethics is only useful here if you are the king, or if it is based on some objectively identified common foundation by which we can derive some understanding of ethics that can be universally applied. You seem to be confirming that neither is true, so it is no different than saying 'my science says...'
quote:
There are many accepted guidelines that govern the ethics and legality of human research. Possibly, one of them already covers the case under consideration. Possibly, two of them offer differing opinions on the situation. Possibly, none of them address it, and it will have to be addressed by committees of ethicists, scientists and politicians. The exact same kind of people who drew up those other guidelines, and following the exact same process.
Ultimately (in the US) our political representatives will probably vote whether to adopt a particular set of rules governing this kind of research. No doubt, each will make his or her own moral reflection on the issue.
Well, again, pointing to current 'guidelines' is as worthless as pointing to the current color of the President's tie. You can't say on one hand that 'this isn't a matter of science, but ethics' and then have guidelines drawn up by groups of scientists.
quote:
How is this case any different from stem cell research, cloning, test-tube babies, or any of the other ethical quandaries that science has placed in our laps? Society debates the issue, ethics are proposed, morality is argued, laws are passed, protests are held, laws may be changed or modified.
Exactly!!! In almost everyone of these cases the prevailing sentiment has invariably turned on the presumed scientific benefits or the temporary desires of the person in charge. There is longer an 'ethical ' concern.
There is no 'moral' basis by which the science community operates or is constrained - in less than a decade, every one of these issues, including the creation of modified embryos, including chimeras, will be inevitably accepted.
And the reason is, because the arguments that you have made, which are reflective of those emanating from the science and secular communities, are so anemic, so spineless, so lacking in robust objective criteria for determining the great moral considerations of our day, that they inevitably fall under the tread of any scientific initiative no matter how offensive it might be to our notion of what it means to be human.
Atheists and their weak, amoral, religious fellow travelers have so gutted the substance of the notions of ethics and moral considerations that they are effectively worthless. This is why you are utterly incapable of eking out the even a minimal argument against the practice of modifying human embryos, other than the barely thought out, "I just don't like it". Pathetic - it's like watching Neville Chamberlain oppose the scientific establishment while giving ground at every challenge.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 4:26:13 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3170
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Atheists and their weak, amoral, religious fellow travelers have so gutted the substance of the notions of ethics and moral considerations that they are effectively worthless. This is why you are utterly incapable of eking out the even a minimal argument against the practice of modifying human embryos, other than the barely thought out, "I just don't like it". Pathetic - it's like watching Neville Chamberlain oppose the scientific establishment while giving ground at every challenge. All I can say is: WOW!!
Do I have your permission to quote you verbatim, Jack?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 4:35:00 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Do I have your permission to quote you verbatim, Jack?
You always do drmark.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 4:47:49 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 509
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
For the billionth time, 'is' does not equal 'ought'.
Similarly, just because we can do something, does not mean we should. Just because it's 'natural' for large quantities of plutonium to explode, doesn't mean that we should all be free to construct and use our own atomic bombs.
Science can help determine what is, and technology can advance what we can do. Neither of these things suggests, implies or requires that this is how the world should be, or what we should do.
That's what we have philosophy, ethics, laws, and religion for.
You failed to explain why it would matter if we genetically modified a human.
quote:
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/05/the-first-genet.html
Is it really wrong? The article is light on the details so I don't know if the following is in the same vein as what they are talking about but..
I think it depends on how its used. There's innumerable possible benefits to this sort of thing, and probably just as many unethical ones. Would it really be wrong to fix an embryo with a trisomy or monosomy? Or fix serious genetic diseases like Cystic Fibrosis? I think the human being that got to live a normal life because their embryo's were tinkered with to correct the defects would be eternally grateful.
On the other hand, where do you draw the line? I don't think I really have the answer but I do think the simplistic religious view of absolutely all hands off on embryo's is unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Genetically Modified Human Embryo - 5/13/2008 4:51:33 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 874
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
I am not sure what the big deal is; if humans are merely the product of the incidental modification of genetics to begin with, what's a little more tinkering going to matter?
It is an interesting ethical dilemna. I will definitely agree with that.
IMHO, the major backlash against genetic modification is fear of the unknown. When in vitro fertilization was first introduced it was met with the same reaction. It was considered "unnatural" and "unethical" because there could be unintended side effects that would harm the infant. Today, IVF is common place and no one bats an eye. Another corrolary is that IVF was first used extensively in cattle and horses so the techniques were honed on domesticated animals before being used with humans. We see the same thing with genetic modification. Cloning and GM are being done in cultivars and domesticated animals first.
But GM also has a component that goes beyond IVF. There is potential health benefits for the infant. At some point the ethical dilemna may be "Why shouldn't we". For example, if you see someone pass out and stop breathing due to a massive myocardial infarction you feel compelled to give them CPR. So what happens when we have the ability to prevent dwarfism, hemophilia, etc.? Wouldn't we also feel compelled to prevent this disease if it is within our power? What then of physical "shortcomings" such as height or eye color? Why not make everyone's blood type O negative so that everyone can donate blood to everyone else?
Many, many treatments, both medical and cosmetic, are treated with medications which fight against the DNA in our cells. So why not change the DNA? I really see genetic modification not as a potential treatment but as an unavoidable one, even to the point of cosmetic changes. The main hurdle right now is fear of the unknown, and the idea of experimenting on humans. But what if there are real benefits and the science is completely fool proof? What then?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
