Ethics

Criminal justice. How do you define this science? People are people? Capitalism itself is a form of accepted criminal behavior. How do you build up the prosperity without criminals tearing it down? Jesus said "you are a city on a hill". How far does one go to: Stop crime. Deter crime. Punish crime. Threaten crime. In the Old Testament BF'ing would get you kick out of the society. Everything else apparently was kosher. Or deserving of a death penalty. In our day, we have prison to hold criminals. Also people who would prefer to live in prison. Very odd housing situation. The psychology science. Criminals commit crimes. Is ther…

If you attack someone based on what country they are from is it racist? A lot of people will attack someone based on what country they are from and claim its ok since they are not attacking this persons race but this persons country. Is this not still racist? Like saying "American is not a race" or "British is not a race". Is this truly a reasonable argument for it? When someone argues with these people over it they counter with "Its not racist, British is not a race and your an idiot for believing so" its ok to attack you for it as long as it is not race". If so what else would you call it?

In a thread created earlier, a list of (mostly ethical) discussion topics was generated. I figured that we should just discuss them all. So, I'll try to post others too, at a later stage (and if anyone else wants to do it, feel free!). Here's the 1st one. The issue: Traffic, merging lanes - when to merge? This discussion is based on this post by Phi. It is worth noting that there were already two replies too: And: Personally, I believe the road should simply have a sign "Merge here (Dutch example)". Obviously, this should be announced at least a kilometer ahead, but if you decide to merge early, you shouldn't complain. In the Netherland…

Must a person always tell the truth, I will bounce the topic with that question?

Is responsible drug usage possible? I'm taking a popular drug named on the streets as 'Meow' right this second, but I've only taken it once over the last year. Is it responsible if done in moderation?

I think this works for ethics, but I wanted to open a new discussion on this, and for future references, I'm not homophobic, I'm not racist, and I don't segregate against any religions. I've heard people try to connect being gay to being black, in that being gay, or having any sexual preference, is not a choice. That you are born gay and you can't change that, and that's people's arguments on why gay people shouldn't be segregated against (witch I think is extremely insulting to black people because they went into slavery, gays aren't even close to that). I want to know what people think, because personally, I think (and I'm pretty sure) that it's completely a choice to b…

I was watching a YouTube video on a question answering session with Lawrence Krauss. He made me think, like usual, and I wanted to make a post about it. If there is a scientist, and he/she is VERY good at what they do, possibly even the best at what they do, they have an obvious utility and their work could be very important and useful for some very practical purposes. Before you decide to take this person on board, you look into their background and find that they have some perversions, but otherwise are a normal person. Would those perversions change your mind about hiring this person and/or funding their research? What if they have seemingly lost interest in their …

I was reading an artical in the New York Times Archive:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/06/science/a-lab-grown-burger-gets-a-taste-test.html?_r=0. It was about some scientists who "grew" some cow muscle, and then it got cooked. Is there anything "wrong" with this. I can't think of any, so that is why I am asking this question.

I've been wanting to have a discussion on this for a while now, but never felt like I wanted to post about it until now. I'm going to make a quote from my most recent book. Here it is-

There exists a doctor, who saves a life every week day. On weekends, she takes on a persona in the lines of American Psycho and kills one person on Saturdays and one person on Sundays. Lately she has confided in you and has given you the option to decide whether they should commit suicide or not. Their life lies in your hands, what would you chose and why?

Recent innovations, such as the nook and kindle, have made it possible to read a book on an electronic device. Is this a miracle, or is it a curse that has not yet manifested. Let us go into a hypothetical future. You are reading a nook, kindle, or another electronic device, and suddenly the power shuts down. You would have no form of entertainment whatsoever. What point am I trying to get across? This topic is about whether or not books should be kept on paper. I am not sure if anyone has debated about this yet, but the coming future promises that books may be nothing but a thing of the past. Books may serve as a form of entertainment if the power shuts off, …

To a wife of an aboriginal, it is both moral and ethical to eat the brain of her dead husband to keep his essence within herself To me killing a bird gives would be heart breaking and if I were to do it I would have a guilty conscience for killing an innocent creature and I feel it would violate my subjectively sense of what I think is moral (I have never killed a bird). What I am aiming at here is to find by debate if there is an innate ingrained universal morality, which no human will step over?. Is there a bar that no one will step over, or is it constantly being raised or lowered due to circumstances of the day? These differencing in morals and perceptions of m…

The Death Penalty by Alan McDougall This is an ongoing subject but in my country of South Africa where the death penalty's been abolished from law crime is now rampant and risen to unimaginable heights South Africa my country has discontinued with capital punishment against the wishes of the majority and crime has worsened unimaginably. I believe only Colombia has worse crime statistics I think there is a point in that, one of the arguments pro-capital punishments being deterrence of future crimes. Personally, I'm more of a 'murdering a murderer isn't justice, just more murder' kind of guy. Life was indeed ended, and as it warranted murder in the first degree th…

Just in case any members are under the illusion that the major capitalist institutions in our societies are willing to protect us as individual consumers or have any reasonable capacity for empathy with their customers - indeed, the Royal Bank of Scotland (Lloyds, RBS and Barclays were all involved in the present scandal) select against existing or potential employees who display too much empathy with the customer, when selecting staff for their Global Restructuring Group programme: Panorama: Britain's New Banking Scandal http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03dz52t/Panorama_Britains_New_Banking_Scandal/ Features two cases of the mis-selling of complex financial…

This topic is evidently being bandied about but the idea at this time is closer to pure speculation than reality according to this article. http://us.cnn.com/2013/01/24/opinion/caplan-neanderthal-baby/index.html?hpt=hp_c3 But if we can should we? Clone one? A small group? Could neanderthal DNA added back to our gene pool increase the over all fitness of the human race? Is there any defensible reason to do so? Would anyone even notice?

So I was watching this documentary earlier, presented by Leyla Hussein, on the topic of female genital mutilation (FGM): http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-cruel-cut/4od Note: the documentary is emotionally distressing and contains very strong language, graphic images and descriptions of FGM so please bear this in mind if you do not wish to watch such scenes. My apologies to those outside the UK who probably will not be able to access the documentary - I am unable to find an alternative version. Female genital mutilation is most prevalent in African and Asian countries but worryingly there is evidence that the practice still exists and goes unnoticed among…

For all of the genetic disorders and diseases that seem to be rooted in family history, would there be significantly less people with these disorders after 1 generation, if anyone with a trace of these problems in their genetics were not allowed to reproduce. If you had even a slight portion of your genetics with the chance of developing cystic fibrosis, if you did not pass those genes on to children, they would not have the chance, and their children would not have the chance either. Sure, that family tree would not be able to grow, but it would create more room for the healthier family trees to grow in the genetic forest. Instead of fixing problems as they arise in peop…

Many believe that the search for extreme lifespan prolongation is unethical on several grounds, citing overpopulation, depletion of resources etc. I want to live for centuries. In order to achieve this I need to eliminate ageing as a cause of death, and hope that I won't die from an accident or injury. But if ageing is eliminated, then it would necessarily mean that all age-related degenerative diseases would be eliminated as a consequence. So, those who oppose the search for an indefinite lifespan are de facto opposing the elimination of these degenerative diseases. Or, looking at this from another angle, many people I ask say that they would like to live heal…

So, I was thinking recently about the ethics of the principle of so-called designer babies. I know there have been a few (three, to be precise) previous threads on the topic, but they are all a few years old now, and tended to focus a lot on whether or not the deliberate genetic modification of gametes and/or embryos to create human offspring with certain specifications is biologically plausible. An equally interesting question concerns whether or not it is ethical to create designer babies? In order to be considered ethical, the practice must fulfill the following criteria: No living humans should be harmed (physically, psychologically or emotionally) by the impl…

In another forum someone explained how science is increasingly autocratic and why, and this goes against my belief that science is essential to democracy, so I googled for support of the idea that democracy is rule by reason, and I found this great U tube argument that relates the connection between science and democracy. http://www.ted.com/talks/lee_smolin_...democracy.html

My online classmates and I were instructed by our lecturer to create these articles on topics that are recently becoming more and more popular and also to post them to a wide audience as possible. ARTICLE: # 1. Are we heading toward Mandatory Human Micro-chipping…and would that be so Bad? Why is there such a need to control persons? I believe it could be made mandatory for certain sectors of the society, to keep track of pets and livestock, criminals or persons with criminal tendencies, persons with chronic health risks, or persons deemed to be at risk. If a person has opted to have the device implanted on his person, that was his choice, he made an informed cho…

OTHER PEOPLE dont exist! Why? PROOF. those OTHER people you see, are merely a product of your five senses. you 'see' another person'=your brain is merely processing the light information sent to you by your eyes and turning it into an image. you FEEL another person=no you dont, you are only being induced to feel a sensation by your brain. apply the above for the other six senses you have and you'll slowly start to peel back the cover on what the deuce im tarkin abart. So in other words, the REALITY of 'other people's existence is actually a complex combination of your brain creating images and sensations! So those people arent really there! its a…

What if we could recreate the brain in a supercomputer? A brain that can has feelings but is trapped, can't move, can't touch, can't smell, can't see. He's a slave, a model for our projects. A brain that would just be turned on and off when it's needed. Scientists probably wouldn't care about this, but it's a real problem. Should there be a law against this before this is even finished?

I realize weird science has been practiced since prehistory. Alchemy led to chemistry. Newton was an alchemist who made real scientific discoveries. Thus, weird science speculators aren't necessarily so delusional they should be restrained in a mental ward. On the other hand, it drives me nuts for someone who has the benefit of modern education and the internet to reject learning and try to convince me and other educated people they have discovered free energy or whatever. I believe that everyone should be treated with kindness, but weird science speculators frustrate me and make me to want to throttle them. I think some must have ADHD because they are so persisten…

If humanity got a point where our population was unsustainable, could culling humans ever be considered ethical? This would take place in the context of a global societal collapse for example, where no outside help could be expected as the whole population is in the same situation. Let's say we have enough food and the means to continue producing small yields that will feed one billion people worldwide. Let's say we also have access to an engineered virus made before the collapse. One in six people have a natural immunity to this virus and suffer absolutely no ill-effects. If we try to feed everybody (assuming also that the food is spread evenly throughout the populat…