Random Thoughts.....What Are You Thinking?

It is one of my top favorites but it would be so much much much better if it didn't have Adam Sandler-isms in there and his little sidekick.

otherwise its a wonderful summer romantic movie and it makes me think all like "is that an ethical relationship?"

and it has a good soundtrack.

we watch the movie atleast once every summer.

NN RT

(Daus,in XIV,archer IS bard!)

IKNOWTHISITSTHEONLYREASONISAIDBARD.THEBARDARMORISPRETTY.

i actualy kinda liked playing it on alpha/beta1&2 so might level it when 2.0 is live

Haven't played any of the advanced jobs on XIV, so might be interesting to try some of them out

Food for thought: How much do you think moral and ethics had held back the growth of science?

not much at all.

Care to elaborate?

Should probably fill in a bit about why I would even ask:

I started thinking of a backstory for a manga, nothing serious just messing around, and the setting is few hundreds of years from now, human has overcome death by aging and disease, people have forgotten about death and a group of terrorist sabotaged the tech and people starts deteriorating. <--- silly I know.

And I started thinking about the possibility of immortality, or if it is even possible.

Then I started looking at some referenced sites, talking about salamander's fibroblast cells, or stem cells...

Then come to this.

The sole reason that I would think that ethics and morals do come as blockade is because for science fields like human biology (and all the branches like human-cell, human-neuron), and western modern medicine/surgeon/health are limited from human testing because it's inhumane. I don't know how to say this without sounding like a person going straight to hell, but I do think human testing will greatly benefit for science in those particular areas.

Moral and ethics also help to deter faulty and misleading science. Sure we could learn a shitload if we could treat humans like lab rats, but how beneficial would that be if the lack of scientific integrity caused us to doubt any or all of those findings?

Test on prisoners.

2000 plus years if ya add in religion as well

Many early scientists had close associations with religion. Probably could've done without the Dark Ages though.

It is a disturbing concept when you think of the implications. For instance, as much as I abhor it, the experimentation in Nazi Germany did lead to some medical advancements. It's from a very dark time in human history and by no means do I condone the methods, but who knows if we would have ever learned what we did about human anatomy.

cant wait till we can get bodies like in GiTS

How is that any less unethical? XD

I dunno why, but that reminds me of Charles Darwin. Apparently the finch guy waited to publish his results until after his father (a priest) passed away because he was afraid that he would upset or embarrass the man.

Prisoners are generally a detriment to society. They should therefore contribute to the betterment of society. Risk of tests/experiments will correspond to the severity of their crimes.

I'm sure you could twist it around and justify it ti yourself.

Most of the early ancient anatomical studies were in a time where cutting people open were okay, be it autopsy or biopsy, and some of the modern science have inherited partial pieces of these knowledge.

I agree to your first sentence, however science itself is based on data collection with MANY FAIL Hypothesis, the scientific integrity, or the lack thereof should affect little to the doubts you have mentioned, at least that's how I see it.

I thought the term "prison" is now known as "correctional facility".

Allowing volunteers/doners/merc for human testing is one thing, mandating inmates as test subjects is another.

Ethics and morality are subjective.

I subject my morals and ethics onto you!

/religiouswar

I submit!

A failed hypothesis isn't unethical or immoral and is a natural part of the scientific method. That's not what I mean by scientific integrity. Morals and ethics tells us not to manipulate humans like fruit flies, but they also keep us from making up results or supporting conclusions we know to be faulty.

Basically, morals and ethics help to keep scientists honest. Without confidence in the integrity of the scientific process, science isn't worth ***.

So just because someone uses an unethical method, his findings aren't credible? I disagree.

You guys are making me uneasy about the fact that I signed up for an ethics class this fall.

I guess I forgot about fabrication of result falls under the morals and ethics category, because what I said has little to do with that, on that ground I agree with you :3

Would go into more detail you already knew what I meant. :3

I'm going to assimilate all of you.

why is that?

I started it, I'm sorry. >.>