Sci/Tech Exponential Technologies: Cheer Up World—We Are On the Verge of Great Things

[chanta45]

Then what is your arguement regarding those things? (Not that I agree with human cloning) And it's nice to see some bright minds on here hah, religion has been the cause of so much discrimination and hate, and I hate it when people say that religions developed "morales" which they didn't.

But back on topic I agree, morality is a human concept not some divine code, and therefore is not absolute... But people think of it as the latter and it does slow down progress

 

[WastedSavior]

Then what is your arguement regarding those things? (Not that I agree with human cloning) And it's nice to see some bright minds on here hah, religion has been the cause of so much discrimination and hate, and I hate it when people say that religions developed "morales" which they didn't.

But back on topic I agree, morality is a human concept not some divine code, and therefore is not absolute... But people think of it as the latter and it does slow down progress

I object to cloning because somewhere along the line they are gonna start cloning for the purpose of "insurance". They will clone someone, induce a coma or worse and use the clones organs to transplant if necessary.
In my opinion this reduces the value of a human life. If they can be grown and harvested like corn, whats next?

On some level morals may slow down progress. If you compromise your morals you can get things done quicker, but you have less understanding of it. If morals force us to take an alternate method, then we learn more about the subject, and perhaps discover a more beneficial use.

Example;
Stem cells has not been inhibited by the heavy moral debates. We're already in practice of using adult stem cells in therapy. And scientists have discovered a method of reverting cells to stem cells. Which has the potential to provide us with a greater and ethical source of stem cells, as apposed to using embryo's. If we had perused the original route we more then likely would not have made this discovery for quite some time, which could mean that a compromise in your morals would have slowed down the advancements of science.

I think for the most part things balance out, and the remainder is something i can live with. :thup:

 

[Seb!]

We have to remember that "morals" is a very relative term. Saying "I have morals, and you don't" is wrong, because morals aren't black and white ideas. Religion oversimplifies things which can't be over simplified. Religious morals are very different than secular morals. Religious morals may not actually be good for the world, they only are the wants of a deity.

People say "Well, a deity would want to do what's right." Well, the deity establishes the moral system. A moral system external to the deity proves that he is not all powerful. Therefore, religious morals can't be applied to the non-religious. For example, stem cell research might not actually be wrong, it would only be wrong because God would says it's wrong.