165 réponses à ce sujet

[Tazzmission]

ModerateOsprey wrote...

Rne3 wrote...

Quite interesting. Science is continously evolving so maybe at some time we will be able to bring people back from the dead.

Of course like most things this will be restricted to the rich and powerful.

Yay.

I don't disagree with that and don't forget celebs of course. If this was to happen can you imagine how they would live their lives? They would be terribly risk averse.

i think with this whole human cloning thing we have had for the last 25 years will play a part of alot of things in the future

[ModerateOsprey]

Dethateer wrote...

Ehh, science. No way to get to it unless you're willing to take a walk through the spike-filled canyon of religion/spirituality and ethics.
[e]Not really. Keep in mind that biological immortality, or extremely elongated lives would cause a population explosion.

This is the thing - that canyon is unavoidable. Science is a human construct and we all, one way or another adhere to some form of moral or ethical code whether our our own individual one or a collective one like religion - edit - or some other group brought together by shared values.

Modifié par ModerateOsprey, 18 mars 2010 - 09:59 .

[Dethateer]

Every single bit of science plays some part in the future. Nothing is irrelevant. Osprey, correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I'd say science could be compared to an extremely complex mathematical equation: lots of unkowns, we slowly figure out, but if we f**k up one tiny calculation, no matter when, the end result will be completely wrong.

[Dethateer]

Well, unless you'd make it illegal for a person to have more than one child per lifetime, even one every 2-30 years, summed up over the whole world, would still show a significant increase in world population. And when it comes down to that, we're already stretching the limits of what our little blue marble can provide.

[ModerateOsprey]

slimgrin wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

Ehh, science. No way to get to it unless you're willing to take a walk through the spike-filled canyon of religion/spirituality and ethics.
[e]Not really. Keep in mind that biological immortality, or extremely elongated lives would cause a population explosion.

Even coupled with birth control? How?

Currently birth control is largely voluntary, but if tech like this was available, who knows? You would prolly have to apply to have children and what kinds of criteria would a judging panel use?

[Dethateer]

I get the feeling the discussion about science will soon turn into an ethics one.

[Ryzaki]

slimgrin wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

Ehh, science. No way to get to it unless you're willing to take a walk through the spike-filled canyon of religion/spirituality and ethics.
[e]Not really. Keep in mind that biological immortality, or extremely elongated lives would cause a population explosion.

Even coupled with birth control? How?

because people don't have enough common sense to use Birth control that's how. 

[Dethateer]

By Woden's glorious name, people, don't re-derail the thread.
(and yes, I'm aware how much of a hypocrite that makes me)

Modifié par Dethateer, 18 mars 2010 - 10:09 .

[ModerateOsprey]

Dethateer wrote...

Every single bit of science plays some part in the future. Nothing is irrelevant. Osprey, correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I'd say science could be compared to an extremely complex mathematical equation: lots of unkowns, we slowly figure out, but if we f**k up one tiny calculation, no matter when, the end result will be completely wrong.

Well, as I said earlier. Science is a tool we use to model the universe to provide us with greater understanding. Interestingly, many of the great scientific discoveries were made when the scientist made a mistake in his/her experiments! One that springs to mind was Lorenz's research into weather (I think it was weather). He set a computer going to run a  long calculation overnight and when he came to the lab the following morning, the computer had crashed but not before it had printed out half the results.

Never mind, he thinks. He re-enters his starting data and lets the 'puter do its stuff and off he goes home. Gets in teh following day and the computer has run the prog and printed the results. They are completely different.

He made an error of one decimal place when entering the starting data the second time and the result was a completely different. This showed the extreme sensitivity of a complex system to initial starting conditions and paved the way for the science and maths of chaos and complexity. and all them lovely fractals and of course, the now popular notion of 'the butterfly effect'

[Dethateer]

That wasn't the ethics issue, it was the measures goverments would be forced to take. Though now that I think about it, you can't not discuss that during a discussion like this one.

[Dethateer]

Bump. Anyone around to continue this thread?

[OneBadAssMother]

I'm curious what do the Churchies have to say about this heh

[Dethateer]

I'd rather that didn't happen. I enjoy that kind of flamewar, but they're no fun here, not to mention the fact that they pollute the forums.