Sense of morality

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Institute of Nanotechnology Forum Index -> Technology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Priscilla Jarman
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 1:49 pm    Post subject: Sense of morality Reply with quote

One of the classic examples is GM food. We all understand that for centuries people have been developing - basic grass has created grain, even by cross-fertilisation - we all understand the gentic side of it. When we get slightly worried is when they start putting animal proteins into it, because we know that somehow intrinsically that ain't right!
Back to top
Hilda Koester
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 1:51 pm    Post subject: Sense of morality Reply with quote

I'm for a lot of new technologies but I've got a lot of reservations about answers in the medical field in particular, in relation to cloning and stuff like that. Messing about with nature, reproduction, playing God
Back to top
Arlene Boss
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 1:54 pm    Post subject: Sense of morality Reply with quote

Interfering with the reproductive process (clonong and embryo gender selection) doesn't sit well with me. I believe in the natural forces of nature.
Back to top
Monique Ruffner
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 1:57 pm    Post subject: Sense of morality Reply with quote

Ten years ago, people said that IVF was wrong, you're playing God and you shouldn't be doing that. Now we take it totally for granted and we think it's marvellous.
Back to top
Gary Orosco
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Apr 26, 2004 2:02 pm    Post subject: Sense of morality Reply with quote

IVF and organ donation have caused much controversy in the past, but obviously for the family of the person ill, you are going to go for it
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:37 am    Post subject: Re: Sense of morality Reply with quote

Priscilla Jarman wrote:
One of the classic examples is GM food. We all understand that for centuries people have been developing - basic grass has created grain, even by cross-fertilisation - we all understand the gentic side of it. When we get slightly worried is when they start putting animal proteins into it, because we know that somehow intrinsically that ain't right!


I agree animal proteins produce unusual
textures in fruit and veg best way don,t buy
regarding the research its brilliant I work
in nanoengineering and things like carbon
nanotube transgectors for cystic fibrosis
and viral fliters for HIV patients are just round the corner. Unfortunately the good the bad and the ugly exists in all forms of science. Frankly money is the determining factor a simple choice indeed
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jan 18, 2005 8:15 pm    Post subject: Re: Sense of morality Reply with quote

Hilda Koester wrote:
I'm for a lot of new technologies but I've got a lot of reservations about answers in the medical field in particular, in relation to cloning and stuff like that. Messing about with nature, reproduction, playing God


In my opinion, any kind of treatment to prolong or better the quality of life of a person is not natural. The prehistoric peoples of the world didn't have access to either curative or paliative care, and as a result, their "natural" lifespan was much less than the accepted norm of life expectancy in developed countries today. Yet we don't see the treatments of today as inherently wrong. Even CPR, bringing a legally dead person back to life (as in their heart has stopped beating, and the shock is delivered to restart it) is totally accepted and regularly performed. So the techniques to enhance people's quality of life from cradle to grave provided from nano-technology or any other method should not have this "un-natural" stigma attached to them. I'm pretty sure the divine creator would want us to understand ourselves and our bodies, including the ways to repair it.

This said, I am against the pursuit of immortality. I think the western world has found a happy medium with the current length of life just under a century. Any more than that, and society as we know it must be completely turned on its head.

We do definitely need to stay within the boundaries of normal conduct set by our current morals.
Back to top
David N Anthony
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:42 pm    Post subject: Sense of morality Reply with quote

It is so easy to become emotive about issues where it might appear that man is interfering with nature. Man has been developing new strains of agriculture for thousands of years. Genes are genes. There is little difference between a gene in a plant and genes in animals when looked at from the genetic viewpoint. It is emotion and the understandable misunderstanding of those who are concerned about what might be considered to be unnatural manipulation by man. Without such manipulation we would not be able to feed the world's population. Nor would we be able to help solve the problem of blindness in many African countires. Who are we to decide that the manipulation of strains of wheat should not be allowed if that helps to prevent blindness in Africa? Nature has a way of ensuring that what might be termed as unnatural acts, cannot be undertaken through making their offspring infertile.
Back to top
Aleks Rokicki
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:56 am    Post subject: GM foods Reply with quote

I think all of the above points are those of validation and of truth...but I do not agree with them. I am most definately transhuman orientated in my views on all subjects of modern technology, which by definition makes me fully behind every single experiment and process that can make our existence and our childrens existence better and more comfortable in the future...the way I see the subject, there is no god, no divine influence...just us, here, now with the technology to accomplish great things...all the elements of nature are tools that we can use, so I belive that genetically modifying, or enhancing as I prefer to call it, is a great achivement...but of course these delecate matters must be reaserched fully in the intrests of general safety.
Back to top
ho
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Feb 27, 2005 2:25 am    Post subject: $$$ Reply with quote

I am not against technological advancement for the benefit of people, but I have problems with the following:

* publicly funded university research resulting in patents for private companies.

* (patented!) GM foodsources overwhelming very important biodiversity. Maybe some people don't think this is important, but I just don't think that it's wise to put all of our eggs in one basket, especially where our food supply is concerned!

* existing technological advances that have yet to make it to much of the world.

This last point is, I think the crux of the matter; with the current "profit-drives-innovation" model, everyone should be dubious of this idea of technology being generally benevolent. Of course, technology is not inherently good or bad, it's just that it is naive to assume that any private business will ever put the good of humanity ahead of $$$.

If this wasn't true, then why are "we" talking about nanotech that allows our shirts to monitor our pulse, when millions of people don't have enough to eat every day! Will this technology ever benefit them? The fact is that much of the world is still waiting for the arrival of what is to us, antique technology. Why? Because they can't afford it.

I know that to some I sound like a reactionary left-wingnut, and to others I could be better informed to make these arguments... but hey, I am what I am, just like the world is what it is.

Take profit out of the equation, and I will trust it.

-mikey-

ho_ofbabylon@yahoo.com
Back to top
marty1
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 9:55 pm    Post subject: Nanotechnology Reply with quote

I have read the many responses posted and have very many resplys. First, I'm not seeing the association of nanotechnology with our food supply, unless we are eating more cabon rings (balls) than I'm aware of? Secondly, the growth of innovation does create fear, fear of the unknown and this coupled with the best sci-fi writers of our time to create additional undue stress on our already stressed out populations.

The fact remains the creation of the new carbon ring or "Ball" (nanotechnology) has created one of the greatest innovations of the history of the world. The development of nanotechnology has ammended the laws of physics and has the potential to create greater advances in technology than any other time in our civilized history. This new technology has huge potential in not only high technology, but in mdeical applications beyond our belief. In turn, human suffering, illness can be reduced and benfit greatly by the research scientists are deidcating their lives on. Unfortunately, corporations sponsor much of the research because fund at university levels are low, so many times there is a right to the invention, since many times the corporations is the one which sponsored the research.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Institute of Nanotechnology Forum Index -> Technology All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1
 

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group