Tweet
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
That's more an exhibit of lack of ethics.
That's more an exhibit of lack of ethics.
-Drachasor
-
Ergo, why there needs to be ethics in science.
-Drachasor"If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work." - Barack Obama -
Yes, I heard of "UCS" then...Comment
-
All this talk of Teller and no mention of Werner von Braun?“It is no use trying to 'see through' first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To 'see through' all things is the same as not to see.”
― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of ManComment
-
"Gather round as I sing you of Werner von Braun
A man whose allegiance
is ruled by expedience
Call him a Nazi and he won't even frown
Nazi, Schmazi says Werner von Braun
Don't say that he's hypocritical
Say rather that he's apolitical
'Once ze rockets go up, who cares where zey come down?
That's not my department' says Werner von Braun.
Some have harsh words for this man of renown
But some say our attitude
Should be one of gratitude
Like the widows and cripples of old London town
Who owe their large pensions to Werner von Braun
You too can be such a hero
If you can count backward to zero
'In English unt German, I know how to count down
Unt I'm learning Chinese!' says Werner von Braun"B♭3Comment
-
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God? - EpicurusComment
-
Well, if your family name is "von Braun", you really don't have an excuse for not being a Nazi.Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?
It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- ElokComment
-
Josef Mengele was a paragon of scientific progress wasn't he, Kuci?I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator RubioComment
-
That wasn't him. It was his twin.Originally posted by DinoDoc
Josef Mengele was a paragon of scientific progress wasn't he, Kuci?What?Comment
-
Re: scientists need to GET OVER IT
Indeed, that way you would never have subscribed to relativism!Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Also, I think professional "bioethicists" are leeches and a complete waste of society's resources. They should be shot on sight. (This goes for any ethicist, for that matter; I don't need to pay someone to tell me what my ethics are, thank you very much.)
In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.Comment
-
Re: scientists need to GET OVER IT
...I think you missed the point. The atomic bomb is still killing people and will continue to do so when you and I are maggot food.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
We just watched a video in DNA Science, and I must say: yes, the atomic bomb killed people. Shut up and deal. We don't need to hear about the "ethical implications" every single frigging time you discover some new gene or whatever! I'm sick of their fetish with figuring out ways their research could cause millions of deaths or - god forbid - an ethical dilemma about genetic engineering. Just like the same dilemma last week.
Read my reply and ask yourself the question again. I think the point they were making is that a science decision can have implications 1,000s (yes, thousands) of years down the road.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Also, I think professional "bioethicists" are leeches and a complete waste of society's resources. They should be shot on sight. (This goes for any ethicist, for that matter; I don't need to pay someone to tell me what my ethics are, thank you very much.)
Is it really so evil to try and make people think, rather than following the herd?Some cry `Allah O Akbar` in the street. And some carry Allah in their heart.
"The CIA does nothing, says nothing, allows nothing, unless its own interests are served. They are the biggest assembly of liars and theives this country ever put under one roof and they are an abomination" Deputy COS (Intel) US Army 1981-84Comment
-
scientists should not be allowed to make anything that kills people, or anything that if misused, would kill people.
Comment
-
Indeed, the corporations and other entities are supposed to do that!Originally posted by Dissident
scientists should not be allowed to make anything that kills people, or anything that if misused, would kill people.
-Drachasor"If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work." - Barack ObamaComment
-
Meh. A spork, if misused, could kill people. The thing about the bomb is that it's remarkably good not only at killing people, but at leaving large traces of death hovering in the air and soil for decades so that future generations can enjoy its malevolence in the form of birth defects and radiation poisoning. Thanks to the unpredictability and randomness of the winds which spread fallout, people who are not involved in your conflict, and who might not even be aware that either side of that conflict even exists, can waste away and die just like your most bitter enemies. Well, except that your most bitter enemies were probably instantly converted into a pile of fine ash at ground zero, the lucky sons of *****es. The atomic bomb is a pinnacle in humanity's capacity for wanton and pointless destruction.
My grandfather was one of the men who first urged the U.S. Government to begin research on nuclear fission. He was also one of the men who later argued against dropping the bomb on Japan. He had to make a difficult decision to weigh of the potential of his decision to either help or harm the human race. When the research started, nobody could guess the sheer destructive fury a nuclear reaction can unleash. My grandfather may have later regretted his early support, though I don't know since he died around the time I was born. The important thing is, if science is explored and funded for the sake of applied technology-the ways one's discovery might be helpful to others-failing to think about how the discovery might also harm others is an example of very narrow and delusional thinking at best. At worst it's just cold-blooded callous hypocrisy.Comment
-
Kuci, you're still in high school. If you hate learning and hearing about ethics all the time, don't go to University.Comment
-
birth defects from radiation are not proven.Comment
Comment