A very good subject indeed -- since it involves both modern science
capabilities and Christian ethics.
Much of the response, I think, may depend upon "Conservative" or
"Liberal" values -- rather than upon "Christian ethics" I can see
"conservatives" as agreeing for more testing to help humans in medical
terms. I can also see "liberals" as arguing for sanctity of life in even
My guess is that it is rather ambiguous with respect to Christian values
--- More "political" than moral. I wonder how others look upon this?
Jan de Koning wrote:
> At 11:41 AM 07/05/02 -0400, Walter Hicks wrote:
> >Some of this can be really good also. I have a friend who suffered from
> >Parkinson's and could not do a thing for himself. They implanted
> >electrodes inside a specific area of his brain and hardwired controls to
> >them. He can now adjust the controls to eliminate all the shaking and to
> >allow him to walk normally.
> >Controlling rats like that seems a bit cruel to me.
> So, there is a subject. How do you do the research to relieve the
> suffering of Parkinson patients, and at the same time prevent that actions
> of rats (later maybe people) are controlled. I believe that as scientists
> we must be aware of the dangers, help each other when someone is forced to
> do something against his conscience, and make sure that the power in
> this type of research is not in the hand of companies, who are not
> answerable to anyone about what they are doing. Must the patent- laws be
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <firstname.lastname@example.org>
In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 08 2002 - 00:06:36 EDT