living among machines have mechanised mam more. we are rapidly losing human value .express your views for or against in 1000 words
Answers
Answer:
We can debate the finer points of preimplantation testing of embryos, selling of gametes, body parts etc in some societies, while all the time these activites are flourishing and unregulated across the world (some of the countries which do ban these kinds of activities on ethical grounds also knowingly buy genetic material for research purposes from places which do not have the same regulatory environment ). You could say the same of much socio-political debate and (in)action: climate change, social justice, refugees, food production. a good deal of self interest, hypocrisy and inertia providing emotive camouflage for the facts. It is a game.
We have not reached any consensus on the patenting of living cells, genetic material of different kinds, or even biological processes. We do sometimes tend to justify our decisions after the fact, on the basis of ethics, and not any other relevant motivation or decision pressure, because the latter is often very complex and interwoven with vested interests. Relatively speaking, I'm not aware of a lot of ethical material which discusses empathy as distinct from altruism. Unfortunately I doubt there is much species survival value in empathy, let alone that nebulous quality "intelligence".. I would love to be shown that I am wrong in thinking such things.
So, I think John Harris's stand is probably the most realistic: we WILL continue to develop and use all kinds of technology somewhere or other, whether it is considered ethical or not in different places. Harris goes as far as to consider this an ethical obligation to improve ourselves. It may be that we ultimately diverge into two species: Homo Hedonis and Homo Abnegatis. We do this because we can, not because we understand even a meaningful part of what we are doing or any possible ramifications. Unfortunately the scope and depth of our ignorance is such that there is no way of estimating how much we dont know, or how soon we will know enough to be fairly sure of any unintended side effects.
We are "muddling through" this technological explosion, like idiots savants, hoping we wont fall irretrievably! Whether it is good or bad is kind of irrelevant, except at the level of personal decision and personal action. Yes, it is dangerous, and yes it is one of the many things we do that may in the end prove our downfall as a species, and possibly that of life on this planet, though that is unlikely given the track record of evolution. We are the mouse that roars...... maybe suicidal behaviour?
Step-by-step explanation: