Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Owlbread]

You're talking about not discriminating against them, and then saying we should keep them locked up?

Yep. Locked up and safe until we understand them better and can figure out how to introduce them into society, or maybe create a society for them. They'd have the same human rights as we do of course; if they really wanted out we should let them out. Hopefully though they'd understand that the world isn't ready for them yet, a bit like the wild boar and beavers and wolves that we have in specially created areas in the Scottish wilderness - they aren't ready to be reintroduced yet, so we keep them "locked up". Neanderthal towns could even be a possibility. By all means, they should definitely be able to enter our society when they learn about it and understand it, but that'll be a long way away.

[RedKing]

You realize you're justifying this by making analogies between them and wild animals, right? 
And the argument of "we're keeping them locked up in heavily-guarded camps for their own good" is the same thing the US government said to justify Japanese-American internment camps (with a measure of truth to it, but still...)

I'm not saying your intent isn't good, just that maybe you haven't thought this through as much as you think you're thought.

[Owlbread]

You realize you're justifying this by making analogies between them and wild animals, right? 
And the argument of "we're keeping them locked up in heavily-guarded camps for their own good" is the same thing the US government said to justify Japanese-American internment camps (with a measure of truth to it, but still...)

I'm not saying your intent isn't good, just that maybe you haven't thought this through as much as you think you're thought.

Yep. We are wild animals and so will be the neanderthals - why shouldn't we make analogies between ourselves and our animal cousins? The neanderthals are a bit better off though than Scottish wild boar in that they will hopefully have the ability to ask to be let out and understand their situation - in which case we really ought to, it wouldn't be right to keep them in against their will. Hopefully though we can convince them not to leave.

Don't worry, I've been thinking on my feet since I made my first post on this subject here, so it's not like you're going to crush deep-seated beliefs or whatever if you dismantle my arguments.

[Dutchling]

Why would you want a society for Neanderthals? Or have them in our society?
I understand wanting to clone because Science, but the above kinda puzzles me.

[Owlbread]

Why would you want a society for Neanderthals? Or have them in our society?
I understand wanting to clone because Science, but the above kinda puzzles me.

Neanderthals had different brains to us; they may have different perspectives on the issues we face today that could be valuable. They may have other physical skills they can provide us with. It's also an opportunity to start afresh and build societies free of the vices we know.

[Frumple]

Unusual cognitive processes can often benefit many lines of study. Fresh mind, subtly different set of physiological cognitive underpinnings, etc., so forth, so on. All things being equal, having another sentient that genuinely thinks (in a neurophysical sense, i.e. the wiring is actually different) differently brings with it the potential to benefit many endeavors. No guarantee, of course, but the possibility's there.

Annd somewhat ninja'd.

[Dutchling]

Makes sense I suppose. Would you still want them if they are inferior in any way to humans, except for really basic skills that you have machines and poor Chinese kids for anyway?

[Sheb]

What's the point of having Neanderthals around anyway? Morally speaking, having our specie being the only left of our genus is awfully convenient, why would you want to change that?

[Owlbread]

What's the point of having Neanderthals around anyway? Morally speaking, having our specie being the only left of our genus is awfully convenient, why would you want to change that?

Frumple and I have given two sets of reasons for why we believe they could be beneficial to mankind and the world.

Makes sense I suppose. Would you still want them if they are inferior in any way to humans, except for really basic skills that you have machines and poor Chinese kids for anyway?

Good question. I'd still want them, but we could let them die out again naturally (i.e. old age) and keep their sperm/eggs in case we need to ressurect them again.

[Sheb]

Oh, somehow missed them, sorry.

I must say I don't think they're a good idea. I mean, creating new breeds of humans for science? (Or recreating old ones) Sure, it'd be interesting, but the moral implications...

[Owlbread]

Oh, somehow missed them, sorry.

I must say I don't think they're a good idea. I mean, creating new breeds of humans for science? (Or recreating old ones) Sure, it'd be interesting, but the moral implications...

I don't believe the moral implications matter at all as long as they've got the same rights as we do, aren't hurt or mistreated in any way or held against their will.

[Scoops Novel]

By my reading it is quite a fine article. I do think it is very sensitive of her to compare the surgery trans woman undergo to the surgery women with breast cancer sometimes undergo to have breasts again.
qft:

Trans women, like so many women who have had breast cancer, sometimes need the help of surgeons, because it is helpful for one's social body to support and confirm one's biological identity, not contradict it.

That's why it's so awful to talk of trans women as men who have been castrated. Such people are women who have had the biological misfortune to have been born with bodies that are out of kilter with the much more complex biology of their female minds. That too, is why the trans community prefers people not to talk of being biologically or born female as opposed to trans female. Trans people are biologically or born female, but with detail of the flesh that traduces their ability to be physically and socially accepted for what they are.

I can understand why she's saying it, but strictly speaking i doubt that barely anyone born with every other characteristic of a gender is born with a female mind.

As for the Neanderthals, I'd expect them to be on a at least damn near even keel with us. Their tools at least were equal to ours, and as far as we know i think their culture. It's still an open question as to why we out-competed them. I think cloning should be done, but not now. It's either isolation as Owlbread has suggested, or bastards killing them. We are certainly not far enough, and i have my doubts about the tech as well.

[RedKing]

Granted, bringing back Neanderthals would be a good dry run for how we'd deal with contacting sapient life elsewhere in the universe. Might be best to do it now, so if we screw up horribly we can burn the bodies and hide the evidence before the whole galaxy knows we're assholes.

I dunno....the !!SCIENCE!! part of me is excited at the prospect. The part of me that's been around 37 years and has no faith remaining in humanity is dismayed at the thoughts of what we might do to them.

[Owlbread]

You fail to realise there are people who would view something like bringing back an extinct species to live amongst others of a different species as cruel.

No, I don't understand it either.

I do realise that, but I think they're wrong. Cruelty would only come if the Neanderthals were upset about their position in the world as freaks/relics or if they were harmed by man, both of which could be avoided through education and protection.

Firstly, I think it is unwise to assume that the Neanderthals would be so different from us that they would face such discrimination and isolation that it would make their existence cruel to them; we know too little about them to make that kind of a judgement.

Secondly, the goal would simply be to bring them back and provide them with safe places to live - that may be a neanderthal village/town/lab or whatever. If they choose to come into our society with a full understanding of it - that's their choice, so it isn't cruel in that respect. They would be the architects of their own fates.

[Sheb]

You were the one defending creating "improved" races of humans created to be good at some specific tasks, right? I can see why you don't see a problem, but frankly I don't agree with you.

Also, we have the general problem that any trial could go wrong and you could create Neanderthals that have a host of development problem or something.