It is good that we both try to be civil.
I also try to balance humor with seriousness.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Help Wanted: Fecund Female To Bear Neanderthal
- Thread starter Revoltingest
- Start date
I also try to balance humor with seriousness.
Care to address the rest of the post?
Your objection was that we would be "playing with life", not that we'd be doing harm.
That's what I was attempting to clarify: Is your objection to bringing back the Neanderthal that it is prima facie unethical to "play God"?
Or is your objection that it would cause too much pain to such a person?
If the former, there's no way to make it ethical. It'd always be wrong in your viewpoint. But in the latter, if we could eliminate harm (hypothetically), there'd be nothing wrong with it.
Reptillian
Hamburgler Extraordinaire
I'm going to join the "it's unethical" camp. I mean, it seems wrong to intentionally create a thinking feeling individual who will knowingly look nothing like anyone else on the entire planet and who might not even be able to function in modern society or communicate effectively (we did outcompete them for a reason...perhaps our innate linguistic and social skills were more advanced. A neaderthal might find it impossible to speak or even learn our language) Also, if I remember correctly, neaderthals likely reached sexual maturity at an earlier age than modern humans. This poor kid would be going through puberty while his peers are learning to play kickball...good luck fitting in and not getting made fun of. Common childhood ailments like chickenpox or the cold could be life threatening, so the Neaderthal child might not even be able to play or attend school with the other kids.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
One thing about Neaderthals is I'll bet are kick *** in sports. From what I gather they are believed to be hideously strong like chimps. I think if angered he might hurt other kids pretty bad and even adults. I'll grant though he probably would lead a cloistered and sheltered life. Strangely though he might be better off compared to his ancestors who probably were routinely preyed upon by large predators.
Imc the jury is still out by way of ethics. I guess it depends upon how such a human is treated and cared for.
This scientist is asking for dysfunction. Unless he stipulates that the surrogate mother give up all parental rights at birth, he might attract a woman prone to Münchausen syndrome by proxy.
Münchausen syndrome by proxy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This whole thing honestly reminds me of the first Pokemon movie, more than it does Jurassic Park: reviving via cloning a supposedly extinct sapient life for the purposes of study (though, in fairness, the lead scientists' motivation in that scenario was using that knowledge to eventually bring back to life his dead daughter: a bit more sympathetic than simple curiosity).
That did not end well.
While the dangers to us in this real-world situation would not mirror the movie's situation, imagine if Neanderthals did turn out to be psychic with the capability to control the weather. Would this person act any differently than the character in that movie, who became the main antagonist trying to take over the world and darn near succeeding (but for the omnipotent power of wove?) After all, he didn't know who he was, and refused to be "used" by humans. This characterization is based off a very clear human emotion we all have: none of us want to be tools of others. If Neanderthals are anything like us in behavior, I'd guess the child would harbor these feelings eventually.
Might a possible solution be to never inform the child of his/her purpose in existing? But would the mother be okay with lying to her child? She might think so at first, but as she watches the child grow, would she continue to be okay with it? Heck, would such a thing be ethical?
That did not end well.
While the dangers to us in this real-world situation would not mirror the movie's situation, imagine if Neanderthals did turn out to be psychic with the capability to control the weather. Would this person act any differently than the character in that movie, who became the main antagonist trying to take over the world and darn near succeeding (but for the omnipotent power of wove?) After all, he didn't know who he was, and refused to be "used" by humans. This characterization is based off a very clear human emotion we all have: none of us want to be tools of others. If Neanderthals are anything like us in behavior, I'd guess the child would harbor these feelings eventually.
Might a possible solution be to never inform the child of his/her purpose in existing? But would the mother be okay with lying to her child? She might think so at first, but as she watches the child grow, would she continue to be okay with it? Heck, would such a thing be ethical?
It sounds a bit like how some you to speak of slavery.
Where has a poster opened the door to slavery?
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Dunno about that, but it does pose a question as to what legal rights and privileges he would have and get.
Anything less than rights the rest of us enjoy would be unacceptable.
I think one way to make the burden less on the kid is if he did have peers. In other words, you can't just make one. I think 10 would be a good number, 5 of each gender.
That way, too, any lab-specimen-ness would be spread out among them, and one person wouldn't bear the brunt of it. It would also enhance the reliability of the data (ie, help eliminate the "is this result normal for this species, or is this individual an outlier?" issue)
Koldo
Outstanding Member
What happens if many are created and given full human rights?
What if they start breeding?
They are fated to get into conflict with humans.
Heck, we are still dealing with conflicts such as racism WITHIN homo sapiens species to this day. Plus, does anyone remember the holocaust?
What if they start breeding?
They are fated to get into conflict with humans.
Heck, we are still dealing with conflicts such as racism WITHIN homo sapiens species to this day. Plus, does anyone remember the holocaust?
I find it more than a little disturbing that so few seem to find this kind of talk repugnant.
Try to view it as hypothetical problem solving if it were actually done (which is extraordinarily unlikely).
I recall reading a book in which the Neanderthals were brought back, and essentially utilized as slaves. They were eventually freed, but they were still treated as second class citizens. And like the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park, they were denied, genetically, the ability to breed. They could request a child, and one would be created for them.
I could see something like that happening, particularly after their novelty wears off.
I wouldn't say that they were "fated" to be in conflict with homo sapiens though. We don't really know how they would be. But we do know about human tendencies. I think it's more a problem of human nature, the issue of tribalism and racism, that we are making strides to eradicate.
Exactly.
I don't see what purpose that would achieve. If anything, giving birth to a baby that would most likely be seen as a 'freak show' seems to me as something that would be more than a little cruel.
Or as one of those stories floated to help us to better guage the moral compass of the readers.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
Which means not having full human rights.
Not 'to be' in conflict, but rather 'to get into' conflict.
Yes, i am assuming they will be able to behave very similarly to humans to the point it would be nearly indistinguishable. However, if that is not the case, then i don't see how they could be granted human rights. Which is another issue.