Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote:
Richard Baker wrote:
snippage
... Suppose we have a time scoop that can
pluck ancestors of
modern humans out of the past and into the present
...enough to make up a small town's population,
grabbing them at 1000
year intervals...I don't think
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JDG said:
You'll have to refresh my memory then, as I honestly don't recall
the
question
There's a clarified version of the question on my weblog at
http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000128.html
JDG said:
The problem with your question is that there seems to be plenty of
evidence that not all DNA is created equal - that some DNA is more
important than other DNA. Thus, its hard to really speak about your
hypothetical, as simply speaking about DNA in terms of percentages
doesn't seem
Richard Baker wrote:
An alternative and more science-fictional version of the same sort of
situation. Suppose we have a time scoop that can pluck ancestors of
modern humans out of the past and into the present (after they've
performed their role as ancestors!). Let's suck up enough such
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Richard Baker
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 7:56 AM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Question for Charlie
I don't think anyone would argue that the ancestors
from AD1000, AD1 or 1000BC
Dan said:
When people first had the potential for gaining reflective self-
awareness
during their lifetime.
But is that necessarily a sharp transition? It seems naively to me
that it might be possible to have various different resolutions of
internal models of oneself, rather than it
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Richard Baker
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:19 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Question for Charlie
Dan said:
When people first had the potential for gaining reflective self
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JDG said:
The problem with your question is that there seems to be plenty of
evidence that not all DNA is created equal - that some DNA is more
important than other DNA. Thus, its hard to really speak about your
On 12 Aug 2006, at 11:17PM, jdiebremse wrote:
I should re-emphasize that in both these cases I would presume the
individual to be human until fully satisified that such an
individual is
not human, and presume that the individual has all the rights of an
adult humanuntil fully convinced
Richard Baker wrote:
Your answer concentrated on the morality of creating human/chimp
hybrids in the first place, rather than on their status once
created. I specifically crafted the question so that the morality
of their creation wasn't the focus of attention, and in fact agree
that
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Richard Baker wrote:
Your answer concentrated on the morality of creating human/chimp
hybrids in the first place, rather than on their status once
created. I specifically crafted the question so that the morality
of their creation wasn't the focus of attention, and
David said:
So what, the rest of us don't get to answer it?
Of course you do. I'm just especially interested in what Charlie has
to say.
The freezing situation is, of course, as close a parallel as I can
think up to the problem of aborting sufficiently early pregnancies,
but putting
On 10/08/2006, at 4:02 PM, Richard Baker wrote:
David said:
So what, the rest of us don't get to answer it?
Of course you do. I'm just especially interested in what Charlie
has to say.
I'm thinking about it. :-) It warrants a considered reply.
Do you think morality is part of social
Charlie said:
I'm thinking about it. :-) It warrants a considered reply.
I like asking questions like this :) I'm still disappointed that I
didn't get a reply from JDG to the similar question I posed about
what I see as his essentialism (the one about human/chimpanzee
hybrids, I mean).
On 10/08/2006, at 4:33 PM, Richard Baker wrote:
Charlie said:
I'm thinking about it. :-) It warrants a considered reply.
I like asking questions like this :)
As long as you post your answer at some time too!
I'm sitting here trying to write vows. Wedding in 3 weeks. :-o
Charlie
Charlie said
I like asking questions like this :)
As long as you post your answer at some time too!
I prefer thinking about questions to which I don't have answers :)
I'm sitting here trying to write vows. Wedding in 3 weeks. :-o
Scary!
Rich
On 10/08/2006, at 6:33 PM, Richard Baker wrote:
Charlie said
I like asking questions like this :)
As long as you post your answer at some time too!
I prefer thinking about questions to which I don't have answers :)
Play fair. Your musings count too. Or are you being uber-Socratic?
Charlie Bell wrote:
On 10/08/2006, at 4:33 PM, Richard Baker wrote:
Charlie said:
I'm thinking about it. :-) It warrants a considered reply.
I like asking questions like this :)
As long as you post your answer at some time too!
I'm sitting here trying to write vows. Wedding in 3 weeks.
On 10/08/2006, at 10:47 PM, Julia Thompson wrote:
As long as you post your answer at some time too!
I'm sitting here trying to write vows. Wedding in 3 weeks. :-o
Good luck! (And I hope the wedding all goes well!)
Cheers Julia.
At the moment, I reckon we've got enough material for um...
Charlie Bell wrote:
On 10/08/2006, at 10:47 PM, Julia Thompson wrote:
As long as you post your answer at some time too!
I'm sitting here trying to write vows. Wedding in 3 weeks. :-o
Good luck! (And I hope the wedding all goes well!)
Cheers Julia.
At the moment, I reckon we've got
Charlie Bell wrote:
At the moment, I reckon we've got enough material for um... 4
minutes. If that.
That will make your wedding guests happy, anyway! :-p
Religious people have it easy. Follow the ceremony, pick a hymn or
two, say I do...
If by easy you mean sitting bolt upright - when I
Jim Sharkey wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
At the moment, I reckon we've got enough material for um... 4
minutes. If that.
That will make your wedding guests happy, anyway! :-p
Religious people have it easy. Follow the ceremony, pick a hymn or
two, say I do...
If by easy you mean sitting
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like asking questions like this :) I'm still disappointed that I
didn't get a reply from JDG to the similar question I posed about
what I see as his essentialism (the one about human/chimpanzee
hybrids, I mean).
You'll have
JDG said:
You'll have to refresh my memory then, as I honestly don't recall the
question
There's a clarified version of the question on my weblog at
http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000128.html
Your answer concentrated on the morality of creating human/chimp
hybrids
Richard Baker wrote:
Suppose that we've more or less perfected cryogenic suspension. People
can be deep frozen and held in that state indefinitely. Thawing is more
problematic. Some percentage of frozen people fail to be revivified
at all. Of those who are, all require five to ten years of
Suppose that we've more or less perfected cryogenic suspension.
People can be deep frozen and held in that state indefinitely.
Thawing is more problematic. Some percentage of frozen people fail
to be revivified at all. Of those who are, all require five to ten
years of intensive and
26 matches
Mail list logo
