Now that we know life is a chemical reaction and not divine creation, does that some how make life less special? I think scientists have lost their empathy for living creatures when they think of life as only a cheap tool to manipulate, and to produce useful proteins. What do you think?
i've seen the video before. Wolpe's a bioethicist and his talk is about the things we're able to do with biology these days and whether we should be doing it, whether we should be doing what we'll soon be capable of doing, and, if so, under what sort of ethical controls we should be doing it.
you're taking Wolpe's talk and using it as a jumping off point to strawman scientists.
and so i'm interested to know which scientists "think of life as only a cheap tool to manipulate, and to produce useful proteins." because Wolpe never even comes close to suggesting that he thinks this is how scientists view life.
you are committing (in addition to the strawman fallacy) the modo hoc fallacy. just because life IS a at base about chemical reactions doesn't mean that it's ONLY chemical reactions.
if you want to talk about bioethics then we can do that, of course. but don't strawman scientists and pretend that they think that life is ONLY chemical reactions just because it is, at bottom, chemical reactions.
Yes for me it is a question of bioethics.
I agree. Through out history humanity has charged forward with little reguard to cause and effect. Science along with corporate capitalism has not always acted in a responsible manner and as a result the whole of humanity is faced with some terrible problems.
I think we have reached a point in science where we can no longer disreguard cause and effect or rush to market for profit genetically engineered life untill we have a full understanding of all the variables and consequences.