The "Abolitionists" want to genetically create a cruelty free world

[Clarke]

Originally Posted by auroraglacialis

This is what self-proclaimed "ecologically thinking" techno-optimists dream of when they are high on the drug of technology and science?

Well, no, because they're stuck in a nonsensical half-way position. There's no real point to doing what they suggest, because either we're OK with nature continuing as it is, or we're not. If we're not, why not just get rid of it entirely and rebuild the world exactly as we find most pleasing?

[auroraglacialis]

Originally Posted by Human No More

They're either trolling or completely insane.

Who? Me? Nah - see, there are people who actually believe such crap:

Originally Posted by Clarke

Well, no, because they're stuck in a nonsensical half-way position. There's no real point to doing what they suggest, because either we're OK with nature continuing as it is, or we're not. If we're not, why not just get rid of it entirely and rebuild the world exactly as we find most pleasing?

This is exactly what these people in the link I copied want - get rid of nature and create some sort of world that is as they want it - without cruelty. Though yes, they seem to want at least to take the present natural world as a base for their redesigned world - unlike you rproposal.

I need to think hard which idea is the one that is more insane...

[Clarke]

Originally Posted by auroraglacialis

Who? Me? Nah - see, there are people who actually believe such crap:


This is exactly what these people in the link I copied want - get rid of nature and create some sort of world that is as they want it - without cruelty. Though yes, they seem to want at least to take the present natural world as a base for their redesigned world - unlike you rproposal.

I need to think hard which idea is the one that is more insane...

Why keep nature around if you have the biotech to do everything it does? (As they appear to assume as part of their premise.)

[Human No More]

Originally Posted by auroraglacialis

Who? Me? Nah - see, there are people who actually believe such crap:

I meant the people actually writing the article . Total biology fail.

[auroraglacialis]

Originally Posted by Moco Loco

Right, I'm not sure what the motivation for such a thing would be, unless the whole idea was just a crazy "what if" moment, more about could it be done than actually doing it.

The motivation is clear ans Silver Stag wrote it. They want to apply "civilized" human ideals that even "civilized" humans cannot adhere to (end of violence and cruelty, love happiness and rainbows with unicorns) to the natural world. And to get there, they basically have to dometicate, break and reassemble the natural world. Essentially they are creating a garden instead of wilderness - a garden that only holds domesticated and in this case even engineered life. I assume they are motivated by that false idea that evolution and progress has a goal and a direction toward something "more advanced" - that they have to improve the imprefection of life according to how they define that imperfection. And its not as remote as one thinks. Yesterday there was a show on TV about transhumanism and the lot - they boasted about all the things that will be possible to be done soon. So if they are true, technically this would seem just beyond grasp. I think there are certainly many people who would like to see this happening if it was possible. Thinking of all the vegans out there...

Unless of course these people do have no value for a natural world anyways but rather want to abolish it:

Originally Posted by Clarke

Why keep nature around if you have the biotech to do everything it does? (As they appear to assume as part of their premise.)

... which just makes clear that some people just did not get any of the messages from Avatar that the natural world and the culture of indigenous peoples have a value of their own and that it is not all just about utilitarianism and efficiency.

[Moco Loco]

Originally Posted by The Silver Stag

A world where nature has been rewritten so it falls in to line with human ideals that even humans cannot uphold.

Originally Posted by Clarke

There's no real point to doing what they suggest, because either we're OK with nature continuing as it is, or we're not.

Right, I'm not sure what the motivation for such a thing would be, unless the whole idea was just a crazy "what if" moment, more about could it be done than actually doing it.