05-03-2003 01:49									#121
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger First of all, I don't think genetic enhancements will occur within the time frame of our generation. We know zilch about how the whole thing works. Secondly, as I said, when everybody is a Tom Cruise look-alike, nothing has been changed. The water table merely has gone up for all.

Sure that's find and dandy for all of you who don't look like Tom Cruise.

	05-03-2003 05:05									#122
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

cieran:

quote: This is assuming that all change can be satisfactorily brought about within your lifetime or mine.

I most certainly do not assume this will occur within a few generations.

How do you explain this position:

quote: These absolute statements are the stuff of science fiction.

quote: It is expected that perfection requires effort.

You promise perfection, but sneer on perfection as the stuff of science fiction?

Why should we believe your promises?

quote: Only the majority of our sensory brain is dedicated to input from our eyes. Useless organs!

Do you believe blind people can function within society? Why fix what ain't broken?

	05-03-2003 05:37									#123
	Support Apolyton

quote: Do you believe blind people can function within society? Why fix what ain't broken?

What if the blind person wants to see?

	05-03-2003 06:06									#124
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Also, these "norms" as a product of reason fall to the devices of what the majority view as reason.

Reason is not relative. What you are referring to is the idea of the majority perceiving something as reasonable. Obviously many of these norms do exist... but many do not, as well. Whereas most people will admit to the first, they will blatantly deny the latter.

Urban Ranger sez:

quote: Secondly, as I said, when everybody is a Tom Cruise look-alike, nothing has been changed.

The frequency of this occuring, if greatly increased, indicates a drastic change. Currently, most people are ugly. Don't believe me? Take a five-minute poll on an average day.

Azazel sez:

quote: How will that consume MORE resources?

Let's see. Resources would have two qualifiers: quantity and quality. Less numbers of individuals who are sick equals not only a greater quantity of resources consumed overall (because they live longer and they have a greater freedom to pursue their desires), they are also able to consume a greater quality of resources because now they are capable of performing tasks that they were unable to before. If my own situation is unchanged, their improvement comes at my expense, does it not?

quote: why should you become inherently harmed?

The more people that inhabit this planet for longer instances of time deprives me of more and more oxygen. These people are only "valuable" if they serve some societal purpose. The blind improvement of people's lives does not consider the issue of how useful this improvement can be overall. If geneengineering allows homeless people to live for millenia, then we are all hurt by this, are we not?

lord of the mark sez:

quote: but i would argue for EXTREME caution

This should be a guideline for any scientific pursuit. Hear hear.

obiwan18 sez:

quote: but sneer on perfection

I am not perfect, and therefore I do not sneer at perfection. BUT, my basic point is that our goal is perfection. Since perfection lies at infinity, it cannot truly be reached, as you put it. And still, is it not a goal worth toiling for? The closer we reach the better we are.

Obviously I "promise" nothing.

quote: Do you believe blind people can function within society? Why fix what ain't broken?

I guarantee you that blind people don't function as well as I do in society. Even if we eliminate all variables but sight... by that qualification, I will still be able to claim that I function better in society. Ironically, the blind person will need heavy genetic modification in order to function better than I do.

ciaran

	05-03-2003 13:11									#125
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Let's see. Resources would have two qualifiers: quantity and quality. Less numbers of individuals who are sick equals not only a greater quantity of resources consumed overall (because they live longer and they have a greater freedom to pursue their desires), they are also able to consume a greater quality of resources because now they are capable of performing tasks that they were unable to before. If my own situation is unchanged, their improvement comes at my expense, does it not?

What are you talking about? If we cure all genetic deseases, and improve health overall, we decrease the amount of resources used on drugs, skilled labor, and various production, as well as cure people.

quote: The more people that inhabit this planet for longer instances of time deprives me of more and more oxygen. These people are only "valuable" if they serve some societal purpose. The blind improvement of people's lives does not consider the issue of how useful this improvement can be overall. If geneengineering allows homeless people to live for millenia, then we are all hurt by this, are we not?

You really believe this? don't you? Not only does the fact that healthy people are happy people is a worthy cause by itself, but the fact that they're healthy allows us to contribute less resources to other causes, as well as allowing us to save skilled working power. Most of the people aren't homeless.( and the fact that these people are homeless doesn't make them less worthy of treatment. )

	05-03-2003 13:52									#126
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by ciaran The frequency of this occuring, if greatly increased, indicates a drastic change. Currently, most people are ugly. Don't believe me? Take a five-minute poll on an average day.

You don't understand.

When everybody else has a rock and you have a revolver, hey, you are king. When everybody has a revolver, well everybody might as well change to a rock, because it doesn't make a difference.

If only you look like Tom Cruise, hey, more power to you. If everybody looks like Tom Cruise, it is just the same as nobody looks like him.

	05-03-2003 15:35									#127
	Support Apolyton

quote: If only you look like Tom Cruise, hey, more power to you. If everybody looks like Tom Cruise, it is just the same as nobody looks like him.

This is not correct.
a) If all people are looking good, people will give more importance to other things.
b) they'll be more pleased with their relationships, because there will be more physical attraction.

Or do you claim that if everyone was attractive, noone would notice?

	05-03-2003 15:39									#128
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Azazel This is not correct. a) If all people are looking good, people will give more importance to other things. b) they'll be more pleased with their relationships, because there will be more physical attraction. Or do you claim that if everyone was attractive, noone would notice?

Not that no one will notice, but it becomes a non-factor.

As for your point (b), it applies to only a small percentage of women and definitely not in relations of any length.

	05-03-2003 15:40									#129
	Full PM-box? Change here!

you know, half of the people on the planet are men.

	05-03-2003 23:14									#130
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Not everyone's standards of beauty are the same.

I would assume that the parents of a gene-engineered child would use their preference when deciding the physical characteristics of the kid. That still doesn't factor in environment issues and personal likes. There are people with fat parents who love exercising, etc. So only certain characteristics are even capable of truly being modified - some colors, some characteristics of hair....

Speaking of, which do you think is better - having facial hair or not?

Since I'm a male in America with European ancestors I would say facial hair is good, but what about other cultures aka Asia?

This is why I think that beauty could be a viable enhancement. There are some great looking girls that I know in school that would never get the time of day from some guys - so who's right? Are they actually beautiful or not?

	06-03-2003 01:40									#131
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: What if the blind person wants to see?

Then let him make that choice. Don't make the choice for him.

Some blind people are happy with their lot in life, and do manage to function as well as so-called 'normal' people.

I have a friend of mine who is legally blind, who reads more than I do, (and I read quite a bit.)

He even plays civ, but he has to stick his nose right up to the screen to play.

I asked him once if he wanted to see, and his response was of course! He has always been curious of what it is like to see properly. But not at the cost of his life. If he could have sight for a few days, he would be happy, but otherwise he was content with his life.

Look at John Milton. He needed his daughters to dictate his ideas for him, but he still managed to produce some of the finest literature in the whole of the English language.

One feature of Paradise Lost is the extremely long sentences. This comes about as a result of memorising long stretches of verse. Blind people have incredible memories of their surroundings, a requirement in order to function.

Homer once said that it is a far greater disability to lose one's memory than one's sight. I'm loathe to take away some of these gifts developed in response to blindness.

UR-
In the halls of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

	06-03-2003 02:59									#132
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Not everyone's standards of beauty are the same.

very correct, yet there are well known factors to which people are attracted.

quote: I would assume that the parents of a gene-engineered child would use their preference when deciding the physical characteristics of the kid. That still doesn't factor in environment issues and personal likes. There are people with fat parents who love exercising, etc. So only certain characteristics are even capable of truly being modified - some colors, some characteristics of hair....

As it seems now, it is possible to predict how will the person look by his genes only, this clearly seen by identical twins. same genes=same looks. Therefore, we can choose the set of genes that will make for the nicest baby, as well as a smart one, and condition-free one.

quote: Speaking of, which do you think is better - having facial hair or not?

You can always shave. These details are passed from generation to the next one, and aren't that much of a difference.

quote: This is why I think that beauty could be a viable enhancement. There are some great looking girls that I know in school that would never get the time of day from some guys - so who's right? Are they actually beautiful or not?

There are more factors than looks. Lots of psychology going on as well.

quote: Then let him make that choice. Don't make the choice for him.

I am not making any choices for him. If he wants to go blind, there are plenty of ways to do it.

quote: Some blind people are happy with their lot in life, and do manage to function as well as so-called 'normal' people.

but wouldn't they prefer to see?

quote: I have a friend of mine who is legally blind, who reads more than I do, (and I read quite a bit.) He even plays civ, but he has to stick his nose right up to the screen to play. I asked him once if he wanted to see, and his response was of course! He has always been curious of what it is like to see properly. But not at the cost of his life. If he could have sight for a few days, he would be happy, but otherwise he was content with his life.

YOU SEE?! he wants to see. and what does "the cost of his life" mean, anyway?! What does that have to do with the topic of discussion?

quote: Look at John Milton. He needed his daughters to dictate his ideas for him, but he still managed to produce some of the finest literature in the whole of the English language. One feature of Paradise Lost is the extremely long sentences. This comes about as a result of memorising long stretches of verse. Blind people have incredible memories of their surroundings, a requirement in order to function.

What would you prefer, to have his works around, or to have all blind people in the world cured?

quote: Homer once said that it is a far greater disability to lose one's memory than one's sight. I'm loathe to take away some of these gifts developed in response to blindness.

But the sight loss is a great loss, too, obviously. Why do you wish to deprave the people from the cure to this loss, for ever?

	06-03-2003 03:13									#133
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: YOU SEE?! he wants to see. and what does "the cost of his life" mean, anyway?! What does that have to do with the topic of discussion?

Can a blind person function within society?
Can a blind person enjoy their life?

I am trying to answer both questions and defend my statement that we should not genetically engineer against blindness.

Suppose the symptoms were cataracts? By all means, you can fix the cataracts.

"the cost of his life"

People adapt. He's adapted to his life. To change means to adapt out of the life that he has built for himself. That can be hard for some.

quote: I am not making any choices for him.

You are telling him that his life is less valuable than yours, that is why you feel blindness should be 'corrected'.

Where do we stop fixing vision? If everyone becomes 20/20 some will want to improve their vision beyond, to gain an advantage over other people.

	06-03-2003 03:19									#134
	Inflate your Upload Space

It's possible that instead of genetically engineering humans without defects, we will simply come to rely more and more on implants, transplants and surgery.

	06-03-2003 03:20									#135
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

On the appearance aspect:

I guess everyone doesn't have to necessarily be "good looking", but symptons such as obesity or oddities can have both health related and mental issues related to them.

	06-03-2003 03:41									#136
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Can a blind person function within society? Can a blind person enjoy their life? I am trying to answer both questions and defend my statement that we should not genetically engineer against blindness. Suppose the symptoms were cataracts? By all means, you can fix the cataracts.

Ok, so are you saying that the only criteria to whether we should cure a desease is whether the patient can enjoy their life, and function within society? Besides, even those two requirements are not answered, since a patient cannot fully enjoy their life, and usually cannot function fully within society.

quote: People adapt. He's adapted to his life. To change means to adapt out of the life that he has built for himself. That can be hard for some.

Isn't that easy for you to say, with full eyesight? Don't you think he suffered a lot because he was blind? But NOOO, you think it is ok for those people to suffer from a lack of eyesight since birth.

quote: You are telling him that his life is less valuable than yours, that is why you feel blindness should be 'corrected'.

I am not telling him anything. His life is just as valuable, and lifeguards/firemen/medics should try equally to save our lifes. What I am telling, not to him, but to you, is that the vast majority of blind people would be happier if they saw. If someone wants not to see, go ahead, stare at the sun for a couple of minutes, and there you go.

Yes, I feel blindness should be corrected, because it's a bad thing. You say it's not a bad thing? would you want to have your child blind?

quote: Where do we stop fixing vision? If everyone becomes 20/20 some will want to improve their vision beyond, to gain an advantage over other people.

OH NOOOO THEN EVERYONE WILL HAVE GREAT EYESIGHT!!!!!!

	06-03-2003 03:44									#137
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

i'm jumping into this thread late, and i'm telling you i skipped like 5 pages here.

i had a debate about something like this in a biology class, we called it "designer babies", where parents could not only weed out illnesses, but also pick the color of eyes, hair, etc.

personally, i see nothing wrong with it. i'm not into the spitituality of life in any way.

the only problem is that this is undoing what nature has done.

example: eventually, there will arise a "design" that is "perfect" as far as most people are concerned. when that design becomes widespread, genetic diversity will diminish. the people who survivded the black death most likely have genes to thank for it, and if we decide on a set of genes to propagate in our species, we may be opening ourselves up for species-wide-genocide.

	06-03-2003 03:45									#138
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

a:

quote: and usually cannot function fully within society.

b:

quote: His life is just as valuable, and lifeguards / firemen / medics should try equally to save our lifes.

If b is true, why do we care about a? What does it matter if someone is 'fully functional?'

	06-03-2003 03:48									#139
	Inflate your Upload Space

because during his life he's less happy?

PLUS, these are resources wasted.

	06-03-2003 03:50									#140
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by UberKruX i'm jumping into this thread late, and i'm telling you i skipped like 5 pages here. i had a debate about something like this in a biology class, we called it "designer babies", where parents could not only weed out illnesses, but also pick the color of eyes, hair, etc. personally, i see nothing wrong with it. i'm not into the spitituality of life in any way. the only problem is that this is undoing what nature has done. example: eventually, there will arise a "design" that is "perfect" as far as most people are concerned. when that design becomes widespread, genetic diversity will diminish. the people who survivded the black death most likely have genes to thank for it, and if we decide on a set of genes to propagate in our species, we may be opening ourselves up for species-wide-genocide.

what the... I could have sworn i saw a thread like this few days ago, and i could have sworn i said exactly the same stuff uber mentioned.

	06-03-2003 03:57									#141
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: because during his life he's less happy?

quote: PLUS, these are resources wasted.

Who says he is less happy? You? I'd rather listen to the disabled people themselves.

So Milton is a waste of resources? One could argue, as I have that his blindness makes his work more distinctive. You cannot seperate Paradise Lost from the method of composition.

Blind people can become very happy and productive members of society. 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'

	06-03-2003 08:48									#142
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Who says he is less happy? You? I'd rather listen to the disabled people themselves.

If you start to think about the consept of happy you will see some funny results. What makes happy?
He said he wanted to see. What more do you need?? I want to see 100% too. He puts his nose near the monitor? I have to put my face within 20-30 cm of the monitor (17") in 800x600, like now when reading and writing more like the 20cm (30cm=1foot). Now you have 2 people who want's to see. Hell, to be honest, If I had to choose between losing rest of my vision or my complete hearing I dunno which one I would lose. Being totally blind would be like hell, no more TV, no more games, no more anything fun.
And I am happy too now, but sure I'd like to see. The body you get kind of grows on you ( ), but it would be nice if it was better from the start. I'd be pretty ****ing mad if I know someone had denied me of this ability, and for the reason of it not being "broke". It is broke.

Do I know that I would be happier now if I could see like the rest? I have no idea whatsoever. It doesn't matter to the discussion. Btw didn't that Caligastia have bad eyes too?

I have a feeling of de javu, did I explain this in a another thread sometime???

	06-03-2003 09:25									#143
	Suffering from ads?

tinyp3nis:

I don't know what his life is like, so all I can do is ask him what he thinks.

He's worried what he sees won't meet his imagination. Does that make any sense to you?

How have you found things? What stuff really helps for you, and what gets in your way?

	06-03-2003 09:28									#144
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by MacTBone Not everyone's standards of beauty are the same.

I agree, I was just using Tom Cruise for the sake of simplicity.

	06-03-2003 09:30									#145
	Get a bigger avatar today!

speaking of tom cruise... i just watched minority report.

It was a fairly good movie. Lots of cool special effects... Thought the story was a bit cheesy and plot twist was overly done but its not bad. Action scenes were very spielbergish, which can be entertaining. The best thing about the movie is the shotgun.

	06-03-2003 09:31									#146
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

As long is the operation is guaranteed to be safe for the child (unlike cloning currently), I see nothing morally wrong with performing such genetic manipulations. I personally wouldn't genetically manipulate any of my children if I had the ability, other than fixing major health problems, etc. I don't think parents should take away their kids' uniqueness through genetic engineering, but this is a more "religious" (for the lack of a better word) objection, than a rational one.

	07-03-2003 00:51									#147
	Got spare money?

Ramo: obviously, we're talking about safe, tested, and Extremely widely spread procedures.

Obiwan: So far, it seems to me that I've won the debate. Could you please say to me why is it wrong to genetically fix deseases, and enhance people? Or do you agree with me?

	07-03-2003 01:31									#148
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Could you please say to me why is it wrong to genetically fix deseases, and enhance people? Or do you agree with me?

I've given numerous reasons...

My position is that some genetic modification is fine, when used to correct diseases otherwise fatal that cannot be corrected through other means. That's why I asked about Huntington's disease, which when inherited will kill you at 40.

The point being that people who are blind/deaf/etc. can live happy and productive lives. Why do we need genetic engineering to correct these defects?

This critique falls within your quality of life ethic.

However, I work within a sanctity of life ethic, quite distinct from yours. People have intrinsic worth and value apart from their current functionality. To 'correct' people is to gage their worth on what they can do, not on who they are.

That any clearer Azazel?

You say we can improve productivity, but at what cost?
I'm not sure 'voluntary' genetic engineering will remain so when society believes that it is cheaper to fix someone than to accomodate them.

	07-03-2003 02:15									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: The point being that people who are blind/deaf/etc. can live happy and productive lives. Why do we need genetic engineering to correct these defects?

a) because those people themselves want them to be corrected.
b) It is unfair to all other people, since they must financially and otherwise support them, while there is a solution to that problem. and yes, it's a problem. if it is not a problem, than why are they entitled to be supported financially?

quote: However, I work within a sanctity of life ethic, quite distinct from yours. People have intrinsic worth and value apart from their current functionality.

I agree fully.

quote: To 'correct' people is to gage their worth on what they can do, not on who they are.

If people have a value that is apart of their functionality, then how is changing their functionality correcting THEM? besides, since THEY don't exist yet as a sentient entity when they are corrected, what difference does that make?

quote: You say we can improve productivity, but at what cost? I'm not sure 'voluntary' genetic engineering will remain so when society believes that it is cheaper to fix someone than to accomodate them.

"volountary" doesn't come at the picture at all, because most of the genetic developemental deseases are irreversible after birth. i.e. you could be able to fix a certain deficiency with Retroviral engineering, but you can't fix an underdeveloped limb, etc.

	07-03-2003 02:24									#150
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Azazel a) because those people themselves want them to be corrected. b) It is unfair to all other people, since they must financially and otherwise support them, while there is a solution to that problem. and yes, it's a problem. if it is not a problem, than why are they entitled to be supported financially?

It's a problem to the society, not to the person.


If they lived in a society where everyone was blind, they would not need special support. Think of it as compensation from society for being so rigid and unwelcoming to people outside the norm.