Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab • Hacker News Board

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#41

Post by Nasrudith » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:35 AM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #29

DC1350 wrote: post #25

More proof that we should all be listening to Alex Jones.

I would say the lesson is can we stop trying to prove him correct. I am getting a bit sick of conspiracy theories going from "that's absurd" to "oh, hey, about that, uhmm, we are actually doing that".

Idiots are like Nostradamus because their incoherent ideas can cover a very large space of possibilities. Especially when steelmanning is taken too far and goalposts are allowed to slide from "this specific resturant is selling child sex slaves in their basement (when in reality it doesn't even have a basement because Washington DC is swampland)" to "my political opponents are all child molestors based upon a tortured redefining of innocous emails" to "child molestors exist!".

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#42

Post by throwitaway1235 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:36 AM UTC

Layman question. Is it to be assumed that doing what the article suggests between human and pig, is much more difficult if trying to merge a human and a spider?

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#43

Post by Koshkin » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:37 AM UTC

I, for one, would be excited to see a variety of intelligent non-human species given rise to. (The chances we’d ever see natural life, let alone an intelligent one, in other worlds seem to be very slim.)

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#44

Post by deertick1 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:43 AM UTC

0_gravitas wrote: post #27

Awesome, love this bit mentioned: ``` “It is sometimes argued that … [the creation of part-human chimeras] will undermine an important moral view: that it matters, morally, which species we belong to,” the report reads. ”This argument assumes that we ought to preserve the view that boundaries between species are fixed, natural, and morally relevant, with full moral status reserved exclusively for humans. Yet even if…

Wow what a ridiculously asinine and misleading comment (the qouted comment, not the HN comment).

The moral reprehensibility of such an experiment is not the result of humans treating any other species as lesser, morally- rather, it is because it is immoral to create something sentient which has not been created by natural processes. To bring a sentient being into the world which is created by human engineering process is immoral because there are no guarantees that we do not create something which is horribly mutated, fucked up genetically, and experiences only pain for its entire life.

It has nothing to do with humans thinking they are better than animals, and everything to do with the fear of humans thinking they are better than God (or nature if that strikes your fancy)

I didn't put this quite as eloquently as I would like to have, but for fucks sake y'all - get your head cut in and don't drink the coolaid of these psychopathic scientists that think they have a better understanding of morality through science the the aggregate of a long heritage of human moral reasoning.

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#45

Post by Koshkin » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:45 AM UTC

lebuffon wrote: post #15

And then there were humsters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humster

We’re all humsters - running in the spinners of our own. I will never unhear Miller saying to a hamster in a wheel, “Keep at it partner. You’ll get there.”

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#46

Post by Ar-Curunir » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:45 AM UTC

deertick1 wrote: post #44

0_gravitas wrote: post #27

Awesome, love this bit mentioned: ``` “It is sometimes argued that … [the creation of part-human chimeras] will undermine an important moral view: that it matters, morally, which species we belong to,” the report reads. ”This argument assumes that we ought to preserve the view that boundaries between species are fixed, natural, and morally relevant, with full moral status reserved exclusively for humans. Yet even if…

Wow what a ridiculously asinine and misleading comment (the qouted comment, not the HN comment). The moral reprehensibility of such an experiment is not the result of humans treating any other species as lesser, morally- rather, it is because it is immoral to create something sentient which has not been created by natural processes. To bring a sentient being into the world which is created by human engineering proces…

So, are trans folks immoral? Organ transplants? Prosthetics? Where do you draw the line?

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#47

Post by Edman274 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:47 AM UTC

hello333 wrote: post #39

Edman274 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my perspective, the fact someone could say that a line is drawn "arbitrarily" is absolutely a worthless red herring. You could argue that the difference between pre-birth and post-birth fetuses is fuzzy and arbitrary, but we still don't allow people to kill newborns. You could argue that the difference between a child and an adult is a fuzzy, arbitrary line, but we still don't allow the exploitation of children.…

I'm pretty sure the idea that drawing a line somewhat arbitrarily implies there shouldn't be a line is a straw man. Who is arguing this? The quote from the article advocates for more stringent morals--that beings that aren't fully human should be given similar moral weight as humans. It also suggests, more broadly, that we should reconsider both where these lines are drawn and if they should really be lines instead o…

I took issue with the quoted part: "it is unclear why it is important for us to preserve the view that biological humanness is both necessary and sufficient for full moral status."

Notice how they said both "necessary and sufficient"? When both are included, there's an implication here that it might be possible for someone to be fully biologically human and yet without full moral rights - that, for example, someone with a different number of chromosomes isn't entitled to life - that someone can be a human and that being human is not "sufficient" for them to have human rights. That's dystopian. Maybe I'm assuming bad faith on the part of the author.

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#48

Post by Thorentis » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:49 AM UTC

zokier wrote: post #23

Thorentis wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are created in the lab and then destroyed when no longer needed all the time during IVF procedures, but nobody seems to care.

How much brain capacity those terminated embryos have though??

You're right, anything below a certain brain capacity should just be killed off. Maybe we could even put such people into camps and then slowly kill them without people finding out. I doubt anybody would care or start a world war because of it.

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#49

Post by rsyring » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:49 AM UTC

zokier wrote: post #23

Thorentis wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans are created in the lab and then destroyed when no longer needed all the time during IVF procedures, but nobody seems to care.

How much brain capacity those terminated embryos have though??

How much brain capacity does a human adult have after a catastrophic brain injury or significant dementia?

Are you sure you really want this to be the basis on which we decide the morality of terminating life?

Re: Human-monkey chimera embryos created in lab

#50

Post by mb_72 » Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 12:55 AM UTC

deertick1 wrote: post #44

0_gravitas wrote: post #27

Awesome, love this bit mentioned: ``` “It is sometimes argued that … [the creation of part-human chimeras] will undermine an important moral view: that it matters, morally, which species we belong to,” the report reads. ”This argument assumes that we ought to preserve the view that boundaries between species are fixed, natural, and morally relevant, with full moral status reserved exclusively for humans. Yet even if…

Wow what a ridiculously asinine and misleading comment (the qouted comment, not the HN comment). The moral reprehensibility of such an experiment is not the result of humans treating any other species as lesser, morally- rather, it is because it is immoral to create something sentient which has not been created by natural processes. To bring a sentient being into the world which is created by human engineering proces…

"...create something which is horribly mutated, fucked up genetically, and experiences only pain for its entire life."

'God' does this all the time already. Friends of mine recently had a baby girl; she is missing part of one of her chromosomes. The family is very religious, and is being torn apart trying to understand how their 'loving God' could have done such a thing. So this 'morality' you speak of is making a tragic and difficult event far worse.

You are also neglecting the 'unnatural' processes that allow many worthy people have children via IVF.

'Natural' science and medicine had it's place back in medieval times, but not now. Same goes for religion.