We often hear this in relation to biological sciences, i.e. gene manipulation. genetically engineered life forms, human enhancement (cybernetics, biological improvements) etc.

Personally I have no problem with it as I think the “We shouldn’t play god” arguement rather silly and it seems many people choose when to apply and not apply this, any medical intervention is playing god as you aren’t letting nature play out.

Safeguards should be in place for sure, but banning this form of science is short-sighted, what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

What do others think

I’d be surprised if most people here weren’t in general agreement with your view on this.

I tend to think the playing god idea in medical terms is when the person with The Knowledge doesn’t properly aprise the person with The Affliction of all possibilities and just starts treating without proper understanding.

>…what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

Ignoring the rest of the post for a moment, pause to invite qualification, isn’t the human body already ‘adapted for long term survival’, not to be confused with me suggesting it’s inadequately so or otherwise, because the proposition of it being merely/‘nothing more’ seems in a sense dependent on the suggestion the body isn’t adapted for long term survival’, and it’s difficult to establish if you mean ‘not at all’ and what comparisons you are employing, and the why.

If you look at the average age a human survives, and compare it with what we build (gadgets, even buildings), well, it impresses me.

transition said:

>…what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

Ignoring the rest of the post for a moment, pause to invite qualification, isn’t the human body already ‘adapted for long term survival’, not to be confused with me suggesting it’s inadequately so or otherwise, because the proposition of it being merely/‘nothing more’ seems in a sense dependent on the suggestion the body isn’t adapted for long term survival’, and it’s difficult to establish if you mean ‘not at all’ and what comparisons you are employing, and the why.

If you look at the average age a human survives, and compare it with what we build (gadgets, even buildings), well, it impresses me.

Not necessarily individuals but as a race.
Lets say we colonise Mars and/or the Moon, we may only be able to adapt the environment so much to be conducive to human survival and may need to adapt the human form instead, eg survive in a lower gravity environment

>Not necessarily individuals but as a race.
Lets say we colonise Mars and/or the Moon, we may only be able to adapt the environment so much to be conducive to human survival and may need to adapt the human form instead, eg survive in a lower gravity environment”

Get back to this later.

Replication/reproduction, along with a lifecycle and death, these too are adaptive.

Cymek said:

transition said:

>…what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

Ignoring the rest of the post for a moment, pause to invite qualification, isn’t the human body already ‘adapted for long term survival’, not to be confused with me suggesting it’s inadequately so or otherwise, because the proposition of it being merely/‘nothing more’ seems in a sense dependent on the suggestion the body isn’t adapted for long term survival’, and it’s difficult to establish if you mean ‘not at all’ and what comparisons you are employing, and the why.

If you look at the average age a human survives, and compare it with what we build (gadgets, even buildings), well, it impresses me.

Not necessarily individuals but as a race.
Lets say we colonise Mars and/or the Moon, we may only be able to adapt the environment so much to be conducive to human survival and may need to adapt the human form instead, eg survive in a lower gravity environment

that’s why you go to venus instead , at 50km its around 25 deg c and 1 bar – atmospheric pressure and importantly you are shielded by the suns rays and have close to 1 G of gravity

Cymek said:

We often hear this in relation to biological sciences, i.e. gene manipulation. genetically engineered life forms, human enhancement (cybernetics, biological improvements) etc.

Personally I have no problem with it as I think the “We shouldn’t play god” arguement rather silly and it seems many people choose when to apply and not apply this, any medical intervention is playing god as you aren’t letting nature play out.

Safeguards should be in place for sure, but banning this form of science is short-sighted, what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

What do others think

I sometimes think that we are moving to quickly with some things, and moving too slow with other things, we still dont know a lot about our DNA and genes, chemistry and so on, but to learn things we must move forward otherwise we cannot learn

I think our emotions come directly from our chemistry makeup, and our environment, we have still a lot to learn, I think dangers can set in if we try that or try this when we still dont know a lot of things about ourselves can seem dangerous, say if we knew that there was everything to know about ourselves then we could make decisions based on more information and knowledge, but that is not how it is, we are a work in progress on a lot of fronts proceeding with fragmented information and fragmented knowledge.

It is difficult to get an overview of things from a distance when there is so much fragmented information and knowledge

like with Paracetamol I read somewhere, there are different opinions here and there about this or that

like with this example, and Im not saying its bad or anything but when you read things and someone says quote

“Furthermore, AM404 inhibits sodium channels, as
do the anesthetics lidocaine and procaine.
Either of these actions by themselves has been
shown to reduce pain, and are a possible
mechanism for paracetamol, though it has been
demonstrated that, after blocking cannabinoid
receptors and hence making any action of
cannabinoid reuptake irrelevant”….

Read more:

that might be not a good example but they say “are a possible mechanism for paracetamol”

It just makes me wonder how much do we know, how much more is there to know, things that we dont know, but should know

if you get my drift

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

We often hear this in relation to biological sciences, i.e. gene manipulation. genetically engineered life forms, human enhancement (cybernetics, biological improvements) etc.

Personally I have no problem with it as I think the “We shouldn’t play god” arguement rather silly and it seems many people choose when to apply and not apply this, any medical intervention is playing god as you aren’t letting nature play out.

Safeguards should be in place for sure, but banning this form of science is short-sighted, what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

What do others think

I sometimes think that we are moving to quickly with some things, and moving too slow with other things, we still dont know a lot about our DNA and genes, chemistry and so on, but to learn things we must move forward otherwise we cannot learn

I think our emotions come directly from our chemistry makeup, and our environment, we have still a lot to learn, I think dangers can set in if we try that or try this when we still dont know a lot of things about ourselves can seem dangerous, say if we knew that there was everything to know about ourselves then we could make decisions based on more information and knowledge, but that is not how it is, we are a work in progress on a lot of fronts proceeding with fragmented information and fragmented knowledge.

It is difficult to get an overview of things from a distance when there is so much fragmented information and knowledge

like with Paracetamol I read somewhere, there are different opinions here and there about this or that

like with this example, and Im not saying its bad or anything but when you read things and someone says quote

“Furthermore, AM404 inhibits sodium channels, as
do the anesthetics lidocaine and procaine.
Either of these actions by themselves has been
shown to reduce pain, and are a possible
mechanism for paracetamol, though it has been
demonstrated that, after blocking cannabinoid
receptors and hence making any action of
cannabinoid reuptake irrelevant”….

Read more:

that might be not a good example but they say “are a possible mechanism for paracetamol”

It just makes me wonder how much do we know, how much more is there to know, things that we dont know, but should know

if you get my drift

Are you drifting into “There are Known Knowns, Known Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns?

bob(from black rock) said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

We often hear this in relation to biological sciences, i.e. gene manipulation. genetically engineered life forms, human enhancement (cybernetics, biological improvements) etc.

Personally I have no problem with it as I think the “We shouldn’t play god” arguement rather silly and it seems many people choose when to apply and not apply this, any medical intervention is playing god as you aren’t letting nature play out.

Safeguards should be in place for sure, but banning this form of science is short-sighted, what makes us human is our mind, our body is nothing more than a life support system and should be adapted for our long term survival.

What do others think

I sometimes think that we are moving to quickly with some things, and moving too slow with other things, we still dont know a lot about our DNA and genes, chemistry and so on, but to learn things we must move forward otherwise we cannot learn

I think our emotions come directly from our chemistry makeup, and our environment, we have still a lot to learn, I think dangers can set in if we try that or try this when we still dont know a lot of things about ourselves can seem dangerous, say if we knew that there was everything to know about ourselves then we could make decisions based on more information and knowledge, but that is not how it is, we are a work in progress on a lot of fronts proceeding with fragmented information and fragmented knowledge.

It is difficult to get an overview of things from a distance when there is so much fragmented information and knowledge

like with Paracetamol I read somewhere, there are different opinions here and there about this or that

like with this example, and Im not saying its bad or anything but when you read things and someone says quote

“Furthermore, AM404 inhibits sodium channels, as
do the anesthetics lidocaine and procaine.
Either of these actions by themselves has been
shown to reduce pain, and are a possible
mechanism for paracetamol, though it has been
demonstrated that, after blocking cannabinoid
receptors and hence making any action of
cannabinoid reuptake irrelevant”….

Read more:

that might be not a good example but they say “are a possible mechanism for paracetamol”

It just makes me wonder how much do we know, how much more is there to know, things that we dont know, but should know

if you get my drift

Are you drifting into “There are Known Knowns, Known Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns?

None of which should temper human curiosity, we just need to be as careful as we can.

Something that would be interesting to find out if it’s possible is can we reset the human brain back to its default settings to treat addictive behaviour, PTSD, learnt aggression (nurture), ie reset the neural pathways before this previously mentioned behaviour was created.

the important thing is to outplay god

SCIENCE said:

the important thing is to outplay god

OK but what game are we playing? marbles? poker? billiards? pocket billiards? creative nose picking?

SCIENCE said:

the important thing is to outplay god

I’d like to now where human 2.0 is, or at least human 1.10

>>Something that would be interesting to find out if it’s possible is can we reset the human brain back to its default settings to treat addictive behaviour, PTSD, learnt aggression (nurture), ie reset the neural pathways before this previously mentioned behaviour was created.

Shock treatment is probably a crude example of this.

Peak Warming Man said:

>>Something that would be interesting to find out if it’s possible is can we reset the human brain back to its default settings to treat addictive behaviour, PTSD, learnt aggression (nurture), ie reset the neural pathways before this previously mentioned behaviour was created.

Shock treatment is probably a crude example of this.

Something a bit better than that yes.

Cymek said:

bob(from black rock) said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

I sometimes think that we are moving to quickly with some things, and moving too slow with other things, we still dont know a lot about our DNA and genes, chemistry and so on, but to learn things we must move forward otherwise we cannot learn

I think our emotions come directly from our chemistry makeup, and our environment, we have still a lot to learn, I think dangers can set in if we try that or try this when we still dont know a lot of things about ourselves can seem dangerous, say if we knew that there was everything to know about ourselves then we could make decisions based on more information and knowledge, but that is not how it is, we are a work in progress on a lot of fronts proceeding with fragmented information and fragmented knowledge.

It is difficult to get an overview of things from a distance when there is so much fragmented information and knowledge

like with Paracetamol I read somewhere, there are different opinions here and there about this or that

like with this example, and Im not saying its bad or anything but when you read things and someone says quote

“Furthermore, AM404 inhibits sodium channels, as
do the anesthetics lidocaine and procaine.
Either of these actions by themselves has been
shown to reduce pain, and are a possible
mechanism for paracetamol, though it has been
demonstrated that, after blocking cannabinoid
receptors and hence making any action of
cannabinoid reuptake irrelevant”….

Read more:

that might be not a good example but they say “are a possible mechanism for paracetamol”

It just makes me wonder how much do we know, how much more is there to know, things that we dont know, but should know

if you get my drift

Are you drifting into “There are Known Knowns, Known Unknowns, and Unknown Unknowns?

None of which should temper human curiosity, we just need to be as careful as we can.

Something that would be interesting to find out if it’s possible is can we reset the human brain back to its default settings to treat addictive behaviour, PTSD, learnt aggression (nurture), ie reset the neural pathways before this previously mentioned behaviour was created.

Yes I go along with that Curiosty is good and all we can do is be careful as you say otherwise we woulndnt get anywhere

how would one go about resetting the brain, I have aspergers, it would be great to get rid of some of my negative behaviors and associated asperger behaviors, that would be wonderful, perhaps levels of trace chemicals or combinations of levels of trace chemicals, some less some more, everbody is a body made up of chemicals,

adrenaline is one of the most known chemical reactions in the human body, fight or flight when someone is under direct threat from say an angry animal tiger lion, or an angry person, stay and fight or run away, someone makes a decision based on the chemical reaction in their body and what the environment is, do they run that way or this way to get away

they are around 72 emotions that we know of, they are around 60+ chemicals in the human body, some chemicals are prevalent like oxygen and some are in trace amounts so there is like a spectrum of chemicals in the human body

what complicates things are levels of bacteria and types of bacteria, what chemicals are around a persons near vicinity that could have interaction and there would be many other factors

very interesting stuff, I wish sometimes to have more time to study chemistry, biology

are there any psychologists studying the chemistry emotion link, joining the dots, there must be some doing it

Welcome to the Chemistry/Psychology department at Curious University

maybe one day at might have its own name

I dislike the term ‘playing God’ IMO God seems to think he’s done well and has done nothing in 2000 years to improve the human condition…

all for gene manipulation and stem cell therapy….

Arts said:

I dislike the term ‘playing God’ IMO God seems to think he’s done well and has done nothing in 2000 years to improve the human condition…

all for gene manipulation and stem cell therapy….

I’d agree with that, I did ask where is human 2.0 or even human 1.10

Cymek said:

Arts said:

I dislike the term ‘playing God’ IMO God seems to think he’s done well and has done nothing in 2000 years to improve the human condition…

all for gene manipulation and stem cell therapy….

I’d agree with that, I did ask where is human 2.0 or even human 1.10

We are living in a time where it would be good to rid ourselves of religion

religion interferes with many aspects of humanity

God is created by humans, yet the believers keep believe

we need to break that meme

and move on

the whole universe is a chemical/compound/elements structure

the Planet is, and we are

if you dont like it, breathe in deeply

Humanity will move on

>religion interferes with many aspects of humanity
>God is created by humans, yet the believers keep believe

Doesn’t the same apply to culture and ideology more generally.

>the whole universe is a chemical/compound/elements structure

Except ‘the universe’ is not really absolutely entirely like that. Everything that ever happened or is happening displaces some other possibilities that may have been or happened, and what didn’t happen and could have been influences what does happen and is.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

Arts said:

I dislike the term ‘playing God’ IMO God seems to think he’s done well and has done nothing in 2000 years to improve the human condition…

all for gene manipulation and stem cell therapy….

I’d agree with that, I did ask where is human 2.0 or even human 1.10

We are living in a time where it would be good to rid ourselves of religion

religion interferes with many aspects of humanity

God is created by humans, yet the believers keep believe

we need to break that meme

and move on

the whole universe is a chemical/compound/elements structure

the Planet is, and we are

if you dont like it, breathe in deeply

Humanity will move on

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

I’m not hopeful, but you never know.

Think about your gut response. Where does it really come from?

I expect now claims of ‘Denier, denier’.

But these are no different from claims of ‘Heretic’

and we can have self fulfilling prophecies.

and the person who will play God here, is entirely predicable.

morrie said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

I’d agree with that, I did ask where is human 2.0 or even human 1.10

We are living in a time where it would be good to rid ourselves of religion

religion interferes with many aspects of humanity

God is created by humans, yet the believers keep believe

we need to break that meme

and move on

the whole universe is a chemical/compound/elements structure

the Planet is, and we are

if you dont like it, breathe in deeply

Humanity will move on

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

I’m not hopeful, but you never know.

Think about your gut response. Where does it really come from?

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

can you elaborate on that sentence?

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

I’m not hopeful, but you never know.

Think about your gut response. Where does it really come from?

—-

Um, morrie, how is the climate change debate religious?

morrie said:

and the person who will play God here, is entirely predicable.

A predetermined universe vs a random one?

I think there is no God

CrazyNeutrino said:

morrie said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

We are living in a time where it would be good to rid ourselves of religion

religion interferes with many aspects of humanity

God is created by humans, yet the believers keep believe

we need to break that meme

and move on

the whole universe is a chemical/compound/elements structure

the Planet is, and we are

if you dont like it, breathe in deeply

Humanity will move on

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

I’m not hopeful, but you never know.

Think about your gut response. Where does it really come from?

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

can you elaborate on that sentence?

Yes, but it is pointless.
And it clogs up the forum.

ok

>and we can have self fulfilling prophecies.

I’d guess some of the subject (reactions, extending to lack of) of weather changes influenced by humans is complicated by both a hunger for anthropogenic conceptions, and elsewhere sometimes even healthy resistance to anthropogenic conceptions, particularly when such conceptions become mentally global and affect so.

morrie said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

morrie said:

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

I’m not hopeful, but you never know.

Think about your gut response. Where does it really come from?

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

can you elaborate on that sentence?

Yes, but it is pointless.
And it clogs up the forum.

I believe that climate change is happening

I dont see the climate change religion battle connection

morrie said:

and the person who will play God here, is entirely predicable.

Oh, dear.

:)

sibeen said:

Oh, dear.

:)

Must, you, use, so, many, commas?

Witty Rejoinder said:

sibeen said:

Oh, dear.

:)

Must, you, use, so, many, commas?

Umm, yes.

Now that my decayed tooth has been cleaned up, filled up

I am not so grumpy, so I should not snap so much

Im in good mood now, interesting how pain can make one grumpy

could be a chemical thing

I didnt even know I had a decaying tooth

morrie said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Cymek said:

I’d agree with that, I did ask where is human 2.0 or even human 1.10

We are living in a time where it would be good to rid ourselves of religion

religion interferes with many aspects of humanity

God is created by humans, yet the believers keep believe

we need to break that meme

and move on

the whole universe is a chemical/compound/elements structure

the Planet is, and we are

if you dont like it, breathe in deeply

Humanity will move on

Maybe, just maybe, you will be able to open up your mind enough to see that the whole climate change debate has become a religious battle.

I’m not hopeful, but you never know.

Think about your gut response. Where does it really come from?

What a stupid comment. Perhaps some people know a great deal more about the environment and are very concerned of its treatment by the greedy and ignorant. Why don’t you say the same thing about the destroyers of it?

Humans have a bunch of notions (instincts for this too), extending even to highly developed working concepts, to do with what is ‘natural’, a lot of which are quite practical, many are somewhat universal across the species, meaning they (have) feature/d as common (or influential) across time and cultures.

‘Natural man’, useful of ethics, morality, the law, norms, the full range of informal and formal behavioural influences, and controls. In it’s simplist form you might hear some person say of another that person is ‘weird’ (and we have special ways of saying it). It comes close to that peron is ‘not safe company’. In the ancestral environments we can assume weird sorts got alienated from resources, help, and reproductive opportunities.

Churchill said of Hitler that Hitler were not a natural man.

What does this have to do with the thread topic? Maybe fuck all.

If humans were adapted, genetically modified or whatever, to live elsewhere, or for some trip elsewhere, we’d maybe have to reconsider what we think of as normal, and what is human (to indulge the thread subject for a moment). I mean at the moment what is instinctively considered ‘human’ is very much from appearances (for starters), then from gestures and how it speaks and the example’s good deeds we have feelings and even ideas about how ideally human it is.

The question is what of a creature that doesn’t evolve to, of, from and amongst its own kind? And amongst a kind there are ‘types’, so i’d expect there needs to be environments that go with the new types, that suite.

I think large changes otherwise are ‘hopeful monsters’ of sorts.