So what about the social consequences of radically longer and healthier lives? In that regard, Diana Schaub in her reaction essay, raises many questions for reflection about those consequences, but curiously she fails to actually reflect on them. Schaub isn’t “willing to say that agelessness is undesirable,” but she simultaneously “can’t shake the conviction that the achievement of a 1,000-year lifespan would produce a dystopia.” She then simply recapitulates the standard issue pro-mortalist rhetorical technique of asking allegedly “unnerving questions” and then allowing them to “fester in the mind.” Sadly, all too many bioethicists think they’ve done real philosophic work by posing “hard” questions, then sitting back with steepled hands and a grave look on their countenances.Kannattaa lahjoittaa MPrizeen vuoden loppuun mennessä, sillä lahjoituksesi kolminkertaistuu.
Salarymen wise up with 'amazing' smart drugs (kiitos, Alari)
Lahjaksi BodyGard 12-in-1 tai pienempi BodyGard 7-in-1
Open Source Biotechnology Project