Human cloning.

[Kuchen Fairy]

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Misses Brinks

We should, yes. But if we can create life, we should legally be able to destroy it aswell. Plus, it'll have harmfull effects on our population.

Why should we? Why should we be allowed to create a human being, take its organs, and kill it?

Quote:

Ouch... but it sounds like a possibility for real clones. Then when they come close to death, just snag their organs. Kind of sounds like the ex-spheres in one of the games I played.

Now if these "clones" weren't put as humans and allowed to develop, then by all means let's make them.

What would make them less human? How would we go about justifying such a practice?

What if you could grow a clone with only certain organs in it, or just grow one cloned organ? You might even grow essentially a body with no brain in it. Need an eye? You've got spares. Skin graft? Kidney? Liver? Heart? Veins? Plenty of spares. It's literally got no brain in its skull, so it hardly classifies as human. It's not sentient, it's not even alive.

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?  

[Fresnel]

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Why should we? Why should we be allowed to create a human being, take its organs, and kill it?


What would make them less human? How would we go about justifying such a practice?

What if you could grow a clone with only certain organs in it, or just grow one cloned organ? You might even grow essentially a body with no brain in it. Need an eye? You've got spares. Skin graft? Kidney? Liver? Heart? Veins? Plenty of spares. It's literally got no brain in its skull, so it hardly classifies as human. It's not sentient, it's not even alive.

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

'Life' has a pretty strict definition, I think. Respiration, nutrient intake, waste removal, energy generation, etc. I'm sure there's more to it than that, seeing as how that would technically mean a nuclear power plant is 'alive', but you catch my drift (I hope). Sentience is the matter at hand here, and in order for a creature to be sentient, it rather needs to have a brain.  

[Kuchen Fairy]

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Why should we? Why should we be allowed to create a human being, take its organs, and kill it?


What would make them less human? How would we go about justifying such a practice?

What if you could grow a clone with only certain organs in it, or just grow one cloned organ? You might even grow essentially a body with no brain in it. Need an eye? You've got spares. Skin graft? Kidney? Liver? Heart? Veins? Plenty of spares. It's literally got no brain in its skull, so it hardly classifies as human. It's not sentient, it's not even alive.

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

'Life' has a pretty strict definition, I think. Respiration, nutrient intake, waste removal, energy generation, etc. I'm sure there's more to it than that, seeing as how that would technically mean a nuclear power plant is 'alive', but you catch my drift (I hope). Sentience is the matter at hand here, and in order for a creature to be sentient, it rather needs to have a brain.

A stream of consciousness, then.
But I understand what you're saying.  

[black_wing_angel]

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Why should we? Why should we be allowed to create a human being, take its organs, and kill it?


What would make them less human? How would we go about justifying such a practice?

What if you could grow a clone with only certain organs in it, or just grow one cloned organ? You might even grow essentially a body with no brain in it. Need an eye? You've got spares. Skin graft? Kidney? Liver? Heart? Veins? Plenty of spares. It's literally got no brain in its skull, so it hardly classifies as human. It's not sentient, it's not even alive.

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

Cells which self-replicate.  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

Why should we? Why should we be allowed to create a human being, take its organs, and kill it?


What would make them less human? How would we go about justifying such a practice?

What if you could grow a clone with only certain organs in it, or just grow one cloned organ? You might even grow essentially a body with no brain in it. Need an eye? You've got spares. Skin graft? Kidney? Liver? Heart? Veins? Plenty of spares. It's literally got no brain in its skull, so it hardly classifies as human. It's not sentient, it's not even alive.

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

Cells which self-replicate.

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

Cells which self-replicate.

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.

Lack of living cells prevents the "alive" argument. And a machine that self replicates? How?  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Silver Screen

Fresnel

Silver Screen

If it looked like a sack of organs then it wouldn't be a human. It'd be just as human as a developing organ in a lab. It'd be human, but not a human.
As for it being alive, I'd have to say yes, it would be. To maintain the lives of the organs, the host blob would have to have all the essentials to live.

But no more alive than the millions of bacteria you kill when you wash your hands.

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

Cells which self-replicate.

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.

Lack of living cells prevents the "alive" argument. And a machine that self replicates? How?

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Silver Screen

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

Cells which self-replicate.

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.

Lack of living cells prevents the "alive" argument. And a machine that self replicates? How?

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.

Ah, but it needs "raw materials" to self replicate, whereas a cell does not. It just splits into offspring. So perhapse "Self replication without the need for tools/materials" fits best as "life"  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Silver Screen

So what is your definition of life? What must be there to signify that life exists in an organism?

Cells which self-replicate.

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.

Lack of living cells prevents the "alive" argument. And a machine that self replicates? How?

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.

Ah, but it needs "raw materials" to self replicate, whereas a cell does not. It just splits into offspring. So perhapse "Self replication without the need for tools/materials" fits best as "life"

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.

Lack of living cells prevents the "alive" argument. And a machine that self replicates? How?

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.

Ah, but it needs "raw materials" to self replicate, whereas a cell does not. It just splits into offspring. So perhapse "Self replication without the need for tools/materials" fits best as "life"

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?

Nutrients are more relative to fuel, than building materials.

"Food" to us, would be electricity to these bots.  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

So would a Von Neumann machine be alive? It doesn't have cells, per se, but it certainly self-replicates.

Lack of living cells prevents the "alive" argument. And a machine that self replicates? How?

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.

Ah, but it needs "raw materials" to self replicate, whereas a cell does not. It just splits into offspring. So perhapse "Self replication without the need for tools/materials" fits best as "life"

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?

Nutrients are more relative to fuel, than building materials.

"Food" to us, would be electricity to these bots.

When you were born, you weighed less than 10 pounds. Now, you weigh closer to 200. That mass didn't come from nowhere. That came, bit by bit, from the food you ate.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.

Ah, but it needs "raw materials" to self replicate, whereas a cell does not. It just splits into offspring. So perhapse "Self replication without the need for tools/materials" fits best as "life"

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?

Nutrients are more relative to fuel, than building materials.

"Food" to us, would be electricity to these bots.

When you were born, you weighed less than 10 pounds. Now, you weigh closer to 200. That mass didn't come from nowhere. That came, bit by bit, from the food you ate.

Actually, not really. The food kept me alive, and gave nutrients to the cells, which reproduced to be more cells, causing my body to grow. Also, muscle mass is more accredited to working out, getting micro-tears, which the body then automatically repairs, giving it more mass, to allow it to carry a heavier load.

The food was merely the fuel, as electricity is to robots. The difference is that organic bodies can grow, and repair minor damages, automatically, where a robot would have to attach foreign materials to itself to accomplish such. Basically, as I grow, my body repairs itself. I don't have to tear my arm off, and attach one with bigger muscle mass, to become stronger, I just work the muscle I DO have, and it upgrades itself, automatically, without outside foreign materials, aside from fuel.  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

Programming. It's given the tools to make the necessary parts to create another of itself from raw materials. AFAIK they've never been actually built, but it's not impossible.

Ah, but it needs "raw materials" to self replicate, whereas a cell does not. It just splits into offspring. So perhapse "Self replication without the need for tools/materials" fits best as "life"

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?

Nutrients are more relative to fuel, than building materials.

"Food" to us, would be electricity to these bots.

When you were born, you weighed less than 10 pounds. Now, you weigh closer to 200. That mass didn't come from nowhere. That came, bit by bit, from the food you ate.

Actually, not really. The food kept me alive, and gave nutrients to the cells, which reproduced to be more cells, causing my body to grow. Also, muscle mass is more accredited to working out, getting micro-tears, which the body then automatically repairs, giving it more mass, to allow it to carry a heavier load.

The food was merely the fuel, as electricity is to robots. The difference is that organic bodies can grow, and repair minor damages, automatically, where a robot would have to attach foreign materials to itself to accomplish such. Basically, as I grow, my body repairs itself. I don't have to tear my arm off, and attach one with bigger muscle mass, to become stronger, I just work the muscle I DO have, and it upgrades itself, automatically, without outside foreign materials, aside from fuel.

Then where did the mass come from? When a cell divides, it turns one large cell into two small cells, each exactly half the mass of the original cell. They have to grow again to make larger cells. This mass comes from the food you eat. You eat, you grow. This is why starving children are all skin and bones, and it's why they grow slower than children who aren't starving.

In short, this mass has to come from somewhere. Your cells can't pull it out of another dimension like a bad sci-fi movie. The extra mass comes from the food you eat. If memory serves, it's largely protein that adds this mass. Thus, protein shakes for bodybuilders and weightlifters.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?

Nutrients are more relative to fuel, than building materials.

"Food" to us, would be electricity to these bots.

When you were born, you weighed less than 10 pounds. Now, you weigh closer to 200. That mass didn't come from nowhere. That came, bit by bit, from the food you ate.

Actually, not really. The food kept me alive, and gave nutrients to the cells, which reproduced to be more cells, causing my body to grow. Also, muscle mass is more accredited to working out, getting micro-tears, which the body then automatically repairs, giving it more mass, to allow it to carry a heavier load.

The food was merely the fuel, as electricity is to robots. The difference is that organic bodies can grow, and repair minor damages, automatically, where a robot would have to attach foreign materials to itself to accomplish such. Basically, as I grow, my body repairs itself. I don't have to tear my arm off, and attach one with bigger muscle mass, to become stronger, I just work the muscle I DO have, and it upgrades itself, automatically, without outside foreign materials, aside from fuel.

Then where did the mass come from? When a cell divides, it turns one large cell into two small cells, each exactly half the mass of the original cell. They have to grow again to make larger cells. This mass comes from the food you eat. You eat, you grow. This is why starving children are all skin and bones, and it's why they grow slower than children who aren't starving.

In short, this mass has to come from somewhere. Your cells can't pull it out of another dimension like a bad sci-fi movie. The extra mass comes from the food you eat. If memory serves, it's largely protein that adds this mass. Thus, protein shakes for bodybuilders and weightlifters.

True, but my point is that, for these robots to be considered alive, the molecules in the material that makes up the robot, would have to be able to automatically divide themselves, as cells do. But they do not. If you want to increase the mass of a robot, the extra mass has to be added on manually, like if I cut my own arm open and shoved extra muscle into it.  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

Food? Didn't your momma ever tell you to eat your ____s so you could grow up big and strong?

Nutrients are more relative to fuel, than building materials.

"Food" to us, would be electricity to these bots.

When you were born, you weighed less than 10 pounds. Now, you weigh closer to 200. That mass didn't come from nowhere. That came, bit by bit, from the food you ate.

Actually, not really. The food kept me alive, and gave nutrients to the cells, which reproduced to be more cells, causing my body to grow. Also, muscle mass is more accredited to working out, getting micro-tears, which the body then automatically repairs, giving it more mass, to allow it to carry a heavier load.

The food was merely the fuel, as electricity is to robots. The difference is that organic bodies can grow, and repair minor damages, automatically, where a robot would have to attach foreign materials to itself to accomplish such. Basically, as I grow, my body repairs itself. I don't have to tear my arm off, and attach one with bigger muscle mass, to become stronger, I just work the muscle I DO have, and it upgrades itself, automatically, without outside foreign materials, aside from fuel.

Then where did the mass come from? When a cell divides, it turns one large cell into two small cells, each exactly half the mass of the original cell. They have to grow again to make larger cells. This mass comes from the food you eat. You eat, you grow. This is why starving children are all skin and bones, and it's why they grow slower than children who aren't starving.

In short, this mass has to come from somewhere. Your cells can't pull it out of another dimension like a bad sci-fi movie. The extra mass comes from the food you eat. If memory serves, it's largely protein that adds this mass. Thus, protein shakes for bodybuilders and weightlifters.

True, but my point is that, for these robots to be considered alive, the molecules in the material that makes up the robot, would have to be able to automatically divide themselves, as cells do. But they do not. If you want to increase the mass of a robot, the extra mass has to be added on manually, like if I cut my own arm open and shoved extra muscle into it.

So "growth by cell division" is on your list of 'things that are required to be alive'? That seems to be a fair point.

Man, you made me think of an old Calvin and Hobbes where Calvin daydeams about getting extra brains surgically implanted so he can get smarter. xd