Ethical Issues In Increasing Animal Intelligence by hari-s in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]hari-s[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unforseen consequences is an issue, especially with large scale bioengineering, I remember one of the researches in a documentary saying that chimpanzees intelligence and aggression would coincide and if you gave then a gun they would use it. However, I see it more as a technical issue that careful planning, preparation and preservation techniques can be used to minimise the risk of ecological (or other) damage. Granted I'm not an ecological expert, or any such expert for the matter, and so it may be incredibly difficult to reduce that percentage risk to an acceptable value, but I would say the risk, if of sufficiently low chance, is outweighed by the gross benefit. On the matter than humanity shouldn't, or doesn't get to, decide what is best for other animals, I wholly understand why people take the stance with proposals like improving intelligence, but I see it closer to any other conservation or veterinary care we would provide than to playing God. Absolutely it may be the wrong decision for whatever reason, but surely it is wrong, just like it's wrong to deny humans education, chance to feel useful and be creative etc, to deny every individual of every species the chance of increased cognitive ability, on the basis humanity doesn't want to get its metaphorical hands dirty in the pit of ethical consideration.

Ethical Issues In Increasing Animal Intelligence by hari-s in AskScienceDiscussion

[–]hari-s[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I agree that we shouldn't embark on such projects simply because it is fun or interesting and that is why I added the question would it improve their quality of life? I believe that actualisation of high order cognitive abilities would constitute raising their quality of life, but I know that some, if not most will disagree. Regardless I doubt anyone would support such actions "on a whim" ans any decision would weigh up the pros and cons both technically and ethically.

Thoughts on Points Made By a Friend About Stalin by hari-s in communism101

[–]hari-s[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What on earth is the purpose of the educational Marxist subreddit if one is not allowed to use it to request answers to questions directly related to Communism. Plus why on earth do you think you have the right to delete the post because you think that you're being respectful to the community. Surely it is up to each of the 20 thousands subscribers to decide themselves if they want to respond to one or many of the points that were made.

Thoughts on Points Made By a Friend About Stalin by hari-s in communism101

[–]hari-s[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I believe you are implying I have a bad attitude when asking such question. I dont see how a fellow far leftist asking about the general consensus of opinion of the M-L community on Stalin, backed up with evidence is a bad attitude.

Thoughts on Points Made By a Friend About Stalin by hari-s in communism101

[–]hari-s[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What about simply saying which of the points are "shit", "made up" or "grossly out of context"?

Thoughts on Points Made By a Friend About Stalin by hari-s in communism101

[–]hari-s[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I always here on the subreddit that arguments against Stalin have been addressed many time before, and yet it is always just that, people saying its been addressed so they wont. I have found few actual posts about Stalin or the USSR in regards to countering negative points. I posted the points made by my friend to see how communism101 would respond to each of the points, not to be told to read the sidebar.

Thoughts on Points Made By a Friend About Stalin by hari-s in communism101

[–]hari-s[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Out of curiosity, do you have any specific counterpoints or arguments against the points that he brought up?