lukeskywalker1 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 hmm, you do bring up a good point there... but on the other hand, (you know how God will, allow certain things to happen, to teach that person a lesson) for inmstance a heart transplant: could be to tell that person you almost lossed your life, now live it better (maybe, im not sayiong thats what happens...) Religion and spirituality regard it as more than that, and maybe they're right, the bible doesnt.... its in there somewhere... about it only being flesh and nothing more, but it talks about the spirit being more than the body. Taking that point of thought, and following the line it dictates, it would then be wrong to use medication to prolong your life through better health, i c your point, but i was talking about, im rich, and i have a pretty good body, but then theres some guy who works out a lot, and i 'buy' his body, just 4 the look. Then i figure that as being wrong. what about the family of the donor's body, i doubt anyone would appreciate the loved ones body being sewn on to someone elses head... its just not the same as donating a heart... theres a still a body. But then theres just a head, imagine going to a cemetary and knowing, theres just a head in the casket... or something. I think there will be more problems with that than religous people. BTW i heard in england, there were hundreds of heads taken without permission, maybe they were testing this... i know they said they were studying them.... -lukeskywalker1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubatus Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Originally posted by lukeskywalker1 but on the other hand, (you know how God will, allow certain things to happen, to teach that person a lesson) for inmstance a heart transplant: could be to tell that person you almost lossed your life, now live it better (maybe, im not sayiong thats what happens...) Yes, and who are we to decide whether in one situation God means it as a lesson or in another he is saying it's wrong? Can you claim to speak on God's behalf in every matter? Originally posted by lukeskywalker1 the bible doesnt.... its in there somewhere... about it only being flesh and nothing more, but it talks about the spirit being more than the body. Exactly, the spirit, if there is such a thing, is more than the body, so don't go holding this flesh in such high esteem. Are you arguing against me or yourself here? Originally posted by lukeskywalker1 i c your point, but i was talking about, im rich, and i have a pretty good body, but then theres some guy who works out a lot, and i 'buy' his body, just 4 the look. Then i figure that as being wrong. what about the family of the donor's body, i doubt anyone would appreciate the loved ones body being sewn on to someone elses head... its just not the same as donating a heart... theres a still a body. But then theres just a head, imagine going to a cemetary and knowing, theres just a head in the casket... or something. I think there will be more problems with that than religous people. Who said anything about the rich guy being able to just buy another body against anyone's will? The final decision of whether to donate a body should naturally be the donor's, or his next of kin if he's already dead, by law. But of course, I'm not delusional; there will be a black market for this too. And whether you're walking around with somebody else's body or just the heart is by principle the same, it's just a matter of perception. Hell, even I will find it repulsing at start if I saw it, but I'd recognize it for what it is. And as for burying only the head of a loved one...There are countless families who have buried nothing of their loved ones, because their bodies were never found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeskywalker1 Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Yes, and who are we to decide whether in one situation God means it as a lesson or in another he is saying it's wrong? Can you claim to speak on God's behalf in every matter? yes thats true, i cant, i can only say what i know to be true, which on this situation i dont know... Exactly, the spirit, if there is such a thing, is more than the body, so don't go holding this flesh in such high esteem. Are you arguing against me or yourself here? lol hmmm, when you say, hold the flesh in such high esteem, you mean like with the new bodies... well, i mean even if you dotn believe in God, and you believe evolution, then you got what you got through evolution, and you got what you got 4 a reason... whatever that may be... I guess it is all about perception, and what each person thinks I right and wrong... like cloning....... it all depends on the person. -lukeskywalker1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubatus Posted June 25, 2003 Share Posted June 25, 2003 Originally posted by lukeskywalker1 lol hmmm, when you say, hold the flesh in such high esteem, you mean like with the new bodies... well, i mean even if you dotn believe in God, and you believe evolution, then you got what you got through evolution, and you got what you got 4 a reason... whatever that may be... Already said what the body is, but can repeat it again if you like; it's a tool for the preservation of the 'I' and for the reproduction of new ones. Simply, it's about survival. Without the 'I' the body is worthless, well, apart of being able to serve as nourishment/fertilizer. Yes, evolution 'gave' me the body as a tool for survival and reproduction (which is extended survival), but it apparently also gave man the intellect to repair and even replace parts of it and, as things are developing, all of it. If you'd care to observe nature you'd notice that there are no limits for what Life will do to preserve itself; killing, scavenging, deceit and conquest are everyday events in nature. Man is sophisticated enough to imagine himself 'better' than this, but basically, on a primal level, he is exactly the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legameboy Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Why don't they just leave our body alone and let us die in peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeskywalker1 Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 why die in peace when you can live in pain for another 9 hours? just kidding really, its just like Jubatus said, just to survive, hey, would you rather die, or live forever? hes right, even in nature all everything is about is survival, seems pointless huh? im here to live as long as i can... and try to live longer, but in the end, we die, its unavoidable... the scientists are only delaying the inevitable by trying, unless they could get people to live forever, which isnt possible... i doubt that will ever be possible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legameboy Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 It's just, cloning, transplants, sperm banks and all, I believe nature should take its path, we don't need science to pave natures trail. I will die, when I will die and that's that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubatus Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by legameboy It's just, cloning, transplants, sperm banks and all, I believe nature should take its path, we don't need science to pave natures trail. I will die, when I will die and that's that. Again is man's delusionally high esteem of himself apparent. We are nature too. Nature as a concept is not a static thing, it is an everevolving thing and new concepts, such as maninvented/discovered medical science, must be included as they come about, for there is nothing man has made that did not originate from basic nature; only the processes involved from basics to product become more and more numerous, hence the road they have travelled become more and more obscured, yet it is an absolute road nonetheless. We are not above nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homuncul Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 And furthermore where would we be without science. Human addiction to knowledge is not accident. It all comes from the same nature. In stone age the more experienced ones were leaders of the tribe, giving wise decisions on the survival of their people. This was part of natural selection, which led us to what we're, self aware beings with knowledge and knowledge to come. And the goal of science was never to prolong life, it was about discribing the place we live in. Scientists just look for all possibilities. If for example we had a way to prolong life of Albert Einstein, then who knows maybe now we had a quantum gravity, or even some theory of everything upcoming. So where is the reason why we should stop doing what we do and "let the nature take it's course". Or do people always judge science for only bad things it produces. But science iself don't do it (science never created atomic bomb, Einstein did, science was only dealing with how half life, or chain reaction went and how it fits into explanation of reality). It is solely done by men that people die of radiation, some stinking polution and influenza. A how again if not without science will we solve these problems. Nature is not against knowledge (it accumulates one) and it's surely not against science. I think it's course is always only with us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.