Scientists create the first synthetic lifeform

[chondro776]

Then prove the presumption wrong. Honestly, have you lived life as a hunter/gatherer for a year or more?

No I have not, then again, I am fairly certain if you get hit by a bus it hurts, however I guess I can't be sure until I get hit by one, huh? I tried to explain that I had something of an understanding, you disagree. Done...moving on...

 

[chondro776]

We took it. There is no such thing as "entitlement" in the manner you are bringing. We evolved to overcome the way we were.

My 'entitlement' sentiments refer to the view many (though not all) humans have that we are somehow superior to other life forms, or that we have a right to avoid suffering, pain, etc.

I addressed the fact that I haven't lived as a HG in my above post.

 

[thumpbass1]

Exactly. Only with the comparative intellect of a chimp.

#1!

 

[chondro776]

That's something that I can't imagine Dawkins, Dennet, Gould, Asimov, Ruse, (pick your favorite pundit and insert here) agreeing with. The subject of where ethics comes from and how to improve on our own biological ethics is a good one. While natural selection is effective, it would be a stretch to call it "good". Natural, yes, but not "good". It's not feeling entitled to a life profoundly different than the rest of the life to want to mitigate suffering and death, even if it results in artificiality keeping inferior alleles in the gene pool, keeping the population in check (there are other ways of doing that), etc. I don't think any of the folk i listed think that humans are special, designed, or what have you. They may concede that we have partially removed ourselves from our original environmental stimuli, but remember, WE did it. we are natural, our nature compels us to act like this, invent new stuff, strive for improvement, ergo our current situation is somewhat natural by default. Great strides continue to be made in ethics and the philosophy of science and understanding human nature from many different viewpoints (genetic, biochemical, cultural, etc). Hopefully we emerge with a fuller understanding of what we have become and how we should act. Even game theory helps with this. Being too dogmatic about any viewpoint just puts on the blinders and leaves one unable to engage in reasonable debate.

Lol. Perhaps I should have used more care in my earlier posts, I think I have mis-articulated (made up word).

I will try to respond to this and the other posts if I can find the time today.

 

[sloasdaylight]

No I have not, then again, I am fairly certain if you get hit by a bus it hurts, however I guess I can't be sure until I get hit by one, huh? I tried to explain that I had something of an understanding, you disagree. Done...moving on...

I never said that you didn't have any understanding of it at all, I said that I didn't think you had a very good understanding of the realities of the dangers of a hunter/gatherer lifestyle. You took offense to me calling you out on that, not my problem.

 

[MEKer]

My 'entitlement' sentiments refer to the view many (though not all) humans have that we are somehow superior to other life forms, or that we have a right to avoid suffering, pain, etc.

I addressed the fact that I haven't lived as a HG in my above post.

We are a superior life form and we do have the right to avoid suffering and pain.

Even inferior life forms actively avoid pain if at all possible.

Life is to be lived and maximized, not ignorantly submitted to.

 

[sloasdaylight]

We are a superior life form and we do have the right to avoid suffering and pain.

Even inferior life forms actively avoid pain if at all possible.

Life is to be lived and maximized, not ignorantly submitted to.

+1

 

[IvanMike]

eh, i don't buy into the idea that we're superior, but i must confess a strong bias towards thinking i'm pretty cool. We win the brainy contest and couple that with useful hands. Prokaryotes dance all over us in the hardiness domain, and most other animals are stonger, faster, etc.

I agree that what to do with scientific knowledge can't be left to only the scientists, but, IMO, if you don't understand the science behind a given issue, you aren't qualified to make the decision either. That doesn't mean you need a postdoc level of understanding, but those making the calls should become very familiar with whatever subject is up for debate.

 

[drteeth]

My 'entitlement' sentiments refer to the view many (though not all) humans have that we are somehow superior to other life forms, or that we have a right to avoid suffering, pain, etc.

I addressed the fact that I haven't lived as a HG in my above post.

Life is about being on top of the pyramid. As a species, we are. And how can you say it is wrong to avoid suffering or pain? That would be the instinctive reaction for any life form. That is exactly what pain is for, it makes us avoid certain lifespan-shortening conditions.

 

[becker4567]

I wish I could trust the people doing this research, the companies that will own the end results, and the uses that it will be put to. I can't, and I am truly afraid!

 

[MakiSupaStar]

Now let me preface this by saying that I'm not bragging here, but I think my balls are too big or dangle too far to the ground to become an effective hunter gatherer. I could imagine a lot debilitating chaffing in sensitive areas if I was to adopt this lifestyle. I'd pretty much be useless. I think I'd hang back in the cave and hump all the cave ladies until some hunter dude killed me.

 

[sloasdaylight]

I could imagine a lot debilitating chaffing in sensitive areas if I was to adopt this lifestyle.

Delicious new out of context signature, thank you.

 

[MatticusMania]

Now let me preface this by saying that I'm not bragging here, but I think my balls are too big or dangle too far to the ground to become an effective hunter gatherer. I could imagine a lot debilitating chaffing in sensitive areas if I was to adopt this lifestyle. I'd pretty much be useless. I think I'd hang back in the cave and hump all the cave ladies until some hunter dude killed me.

A little known historical fact, Maki: not only were there hunters & gatherers, but there was a special breed of man, much like you or I, whose genes were held to the ruling standard. These men were the Procreators, and the reason humans have carried on for so long. What? You think think the hunters and gatherers werent too tired to shag after a day of hunting or gathering? They just wanted to sit back in their cave, with their cavebeer, and not get nagged. Not only did the Procreators help further the human race, but they also kept the wimmin from getting too, well 'female dogish'.

 

[MakiSupaStar]

Delicious new out of context signature, thank you.

Well could you be a deary and at least add the 'of' I left out of it.

 

[sloasdaylight]

Well could you be a deary and at least add the 'of' I left out of it.

I suppose, since you asked nicely.

 

[Deluge Of Sound]

i'll try not to sound harsh. anyway,
we do live much much better
medical care, most of the diseases that are so easily cured could kill you 200 years ago, not to mention 2000years ago.
longevity
living conditions (imagine living in cities few hundred years ago that had no real sewage system, drinking your own feces/urine - not an exaggeration)
high crime rate
no "modern" human rights (death sentence for a small theft, no freedom of speech, no right to vote, self imposed despots, unfair justice system)
horrible working conditions (child labor, practical slavery, if you got injured on work no one is gonna pay you for not working)
food of horrible quality (yes, people died/had serious deformations from lack of nutrients, vitamins, etc, and let's not forget no sanitation)
lack of clean, drinking water (especially in cities)
lack of opportunity for education and prospering future (if you were born in a peasant family, chances of a bright future/education/etc were 1 in a zillion)
large part of children born died before they reached 7 years of life.
mothers died at giving birth much to often.
lack of free information.
and no way for you to be a musician just like that.
and let's just not get started on wars and atrocities that were normal (genocide, mass executions, horrible torture were normal stuff)

we really take too much for granted the positive sides of our time that we fail to notice them.

our time = WIN!

If you haven't, please check out the rest of my posts. I've got no problem with differing conclusions (because, ultimately, that's what this boils down to), but I'd rather not re-elaborate.

 

[BassyBill]

We are a superior life form and we do have the right to avoid suffering and pain.

Even inferior life forms actively avoid pain if at all possible.

Life is to be lived and maximized, not ignorantly submitted to.

Is it big font day again already?

 

[machine gewehr]

This exponentially increases humans' ability to screw things up. Consider, as an example, the invention and deployment of drugs that ultimately are found to have dire side effects (e.g. thalidomide, fen-phen, etc.). Now we have synthetic organisms that, by definition, can self-replicate. How do you put the genie back in the bottle when one of these critters makes it into the genpop, and we find out it is worse than ebola in the long run?

I call bad karma. I'm not anti-techno at all, but humans have repeatedly proven that we get ahead of ourselves and bad things can happen. The technology of atomic fission held a lot of promise for beneficial applications, but its first use was the destruction of major cities. Then, it created the cold war and the proliferation of enough weapons to end society as we know it.

This one is even scarier, in my book.

However,the nukes most likely prevented a 3rd world war.Every one knows if it started,we will be obliterated,extinct and leave the world to cockroaches.So no country has the balls to start a 3rd (most likely a nuclear) war.

But as Einstein said,"Peace can not be kept by force,it can only be achieved by understanding".

On the subject,I hope these life forms will get smart and kill us all,make the world a better place.

 

[ROGI]

If you haven't, please check out the rest of my posts. I've got no problem with differing conclusions (because, ultimately, that's what this boils down to), but I'd rather not re-elaborate.

true, i was kinda parachuting into the topic. sorry for that.

 

[coreyfyfe]

This exponentially increases humans' ability to screw things up. Consider, as an example, the invention and deployment of drugs that ultimately are found to have dire side effects (e.g. thalidomide, fen-phen, etc.).

We also learn from our mistakes. To take from what you've said, thalidomide was a product of a generation when there were few limitations on the need for testing before going to market with a drug. From this, we have birthed restrictions on marketing/distribution and testing requirements on drugs. Sucks that people had to get birth defects, but most large entities (governments or businesses, both to blame here) are not usually willing to act until forced. And further more, thalidomide has been found to have some promising activity in cancer treatment since it is antiangiogenic.

Now we have synthetic organisms that, by definition, can self-replicate. How do you put the genie back in the bottle when one of these critters makes it into the genpop, and we find out it is worse than ebola in the long run?

They made a synthetic bacterial genome. It's really no worse than what people are already going on a daily basis in terms of other types of genetic manipulation, the big news from all of this is that they were able to do proof of concept for fully synthetic systems rather than having to modify an existing system for semi-synthetic purposes. IMO, this is actually a much better way of doing things because you can engineer out the virulence genes and insert all kinds of more interesting sequences. I was reading a paper a few years ago about a group that inserted the genes for parts of an alcohol synthase pathway into e.coli so that they could easily ferment ethanol for biofuels. Really cool concept, but a huge undertaking in terms of the multiple insertions that had to be made to produce stable copies of the non-native enzymes as well as determining which portions of the multiple potential pathways were most effective. If they could have just synthesize the genome, controlling for location of the inserted genes, selecting for promoter control, etc, I'm sure their lives would have been a lot easier.

The technology of atomic fission held a lot of promise for beneficial applications, but its first use was the destruction of major cities. Then, it created the cold war and the proliferation of enough weapons to end society as we know it.

Yup, that one is scary. But it has also lived up to a good portion of it's promise in terms of science, medicine, and energy. Again, application is key, and regulating use is/will be important.