Is being ethical ethical?
Forums › General Discussion › Is being ethical ethical?-
It is common to believe we must do all we can to improve science, technology and practices to cure disease, promote longer lives and delay death whenever possible. That is considered ethical.
On the devil’s advocate side: is it ethical to extend life and the numbers living?
elders living in confined “cells” who are fully at the mercy of caregivers like a newborn.Curing diabetes and heart disease so that mass society can quit worrying about diet and exercise.
Cure cancer, cure kidney disease, cure MS.
Everyone should live to be 100 unless a horrible accident occurs.
The ethical mission to save everyone is realistically a major contributor to the extinction of humans as uncontrolled population kills the ecosystem.
-
Persephone Is high again.
-
Is It too much to ask for : a society where a chicken can cross the road without his motives being questioned?
-
Every animal on this planet does what it can to live as long as it can, with prides, packs, and herds helping each other. I don’t think humans should be any different. I wouldn’t want to be alive for the sake of being alive if I was in a vegetative state, but I don’t think humans should be playing God either. Also, I’m not sure if I agree with this mainly because I just don’t want to believe it ... but I’ve heard people argue that your devil’s advocate point is already happening. Take cancer research as an example. With all of the years spent researching with all of the money being donated to research, there isn’t a cure yet?
Nice thought provoking topic Persephone.
-
Are you talking about ethics in an objective or subjective sense?
-
If you dont drink, smoke, eat red meat you add years onto your life. These years are not added in your 30s when you want them they are added when you are old, cant move, in pain and just waiting to go
-
DC ONE wrote:
I think the idea there is that you are also adding quality to the years you do have, not just extra years. For example, at age 50 I imagine one would have better quality of life with both feet (e.g. they avoided diabetes, especially untreated diabetes and didn’t require a foot to be amputated). Of course, you could be in top shape at age 40 and still drop dead of a heart attack, aneurism, etc. What is my point? Beats me. 🤷🏼♀️If you dont drink, smoke, eat red meat you add years onto your life. These years are not added in your 30s when you want them they are added when you are old, cant move, in pain and just waiting to go
-
Lol i believe we all have a clock
-
I think it’s ethical to improve quality of life. There are tons of diseases/conditions out there. Even if you cured all the existing ones, not everyone would live to 100 (not even counting accidents). Plus, things like viruses can mutate. Ha - I wonder how many vaccines a person would need for everything over their lifetime if vaccines could be made for everything.
Even then, people would still have to worry about diet and exercise, unless you are genetically modifying them. That’s an entirely different can of worms to debate.
-
Soylent Green is people!!
-
DC ONE wrote:
😂😂😂😂🤣If you dont drink, smoke, eat red meat you add years onto your life. These years are not added in your 30s when you want them they are added when you are old, cant move, in pain and just waiting to go
-
∞🪓Persephone🌲∞ wrote:
What would society be like if we CAN'T ask why?Is It too much to ask for : a society where a chicken can cross the road without his motives being questioned?
-
Mystery wrote:
That’s an excellent twist to a great story!Soylent Green is people!!
-
too many peeps eating n drinking shit all day every day, manufactured sugared n salted bs that I wouldn’t give my dog
balanced diet n excercise
eat healthy drink healthybtw single malt every night
-
Coolio wrote:
Hey, I like some occasional “population control” food. 😝too many peeps eating n drinking shit all day every day, manufactured sugared n salted bs that I wouldn’t give my dog
balanced diet n excercise
eat healthy drink healthybtw single malt every night
-
I just watched Soylent Green. I would consider their practice unethical.
-
BigAl! wrote:
😂😂I just watched Soylent Green. I would consider their practice unethical.
-
Mystery wrote:
I disagree, and I ask my question again: Are we talking subjectively unethical or objectively unethical?BigAl! wrote:
😂😂I just watched Soylent Green. I would consider their practice unethical.
WHY do you think it’s unethical to eat old people? I’m just trying to understand.
-
It's not necessarily unethical to eat the recently deceased. What is unethical is to blatantly lie to the consumer by advertising your product as being made from highly nutritious ocean plankton, when in fact there is not a speck of ocean plankton in it. And to not mention that it is made from 100% human remains, that's not an ethical practice.
-
Brown🎵Note wrote:
Mystery wrote:
I disagree, and I ask my question again: Are we talking subjectively unethical or objectively unethical?BigAl! wrote:
😂😂I just watched Soylent Green. I would consider their practice unethical.
WHY do you think it’s unethical to eat old people? I’m just trying to understand.
Having been trained in culinary arts. The protein of aged beasts is chewier and bears less desirable flavors. Young beasts when butchered before adulthood have more desirable flavor but less fat content. Fat content enhances flavor. So there is a balance. The chunky 30 year old will be better than the skinny 17 year old, but both would be better than the 80 year old.
-
So yes, it would be unethical to eat a foul Saba when there is a perfectly fine Tom available for cooking.
-
Mystery wrote:
Exactly what I wanted to write, by curing patients and eradicating deceases not only we improve people quality of life but we are indirectly extending their lives. For me yes, it is ethical to do it.I think it’s ethical to improve quality of life. There are tons of diseases/conditions out there. Even if you cured all the existing ones, not everyone would live to 100 (not even counting accidents). Plus, things like viruses can mutate. Ha - I wonder how many vaccines a person would need for everything over their lifetime if vaccines could be made for everything.
Even then, people would still have to worry about diet and exercise, unless you are genetically modifying them. That’s an entirely different can of worms to debate.
-
∞🪓Persephone🌲∞ wrote:
🤔🤣😂😂So yes, it would be unethical to eat a foul Saba when there is a perfectly fine Tom available for cooking.
-
BigAl! wrote:
They definitely would get shut down by the FDAIt's not necessarily unethical to eat the recently deceased. What is unethical is to blatantly lie to the consumer by advertising your product as being made from highly nutritious ocean plankton, when in fact there is not a speck of ocean plankton in it. And to not mention that it is made from 100% human remains, that's not an ethical practice.
-
Brown🎵Note wrote:
How would you determine whether something is objectively ethical or unethical? Based on your subjective opinion? Based on your subjective opinion of what factors you should be measuring? Is it possible to be objective? (Of course your answer to that will be subjective.)Mystery wrote:
I disagree, and I ask my question again: Are we talking subjectively unethical or objectively unethical?BigAl! wrote:
😂😂I just watched Soylent Green. I would consider their practice unethical.
WHY do you think it’s unethical to eat old people? I’m just trying to understand.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC