Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies


The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.


Search the IEET
Subscribe and Contribute to:


Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Overview of technopolitics


whats new at ieet

First Republican “Hamilton Elector” Breaks Ranks Against Trump

Cybathlon 2016 : entre sport, handicap et transhumanisme

U.S. To Forgive $108 Billion In Student Debt

The informal sector Singularity

Global Trends - The Rising Longevity Industry

Mark Blyth ─ Global Trumpism


ieet books

TECHNOPROG, le transhumanisme au service du progrès social
Author
Marc Roux and Didier Coeurnelle





JET

Enframing the Flesh: Heidegger, Transhumanism, and the Body as “Standing Reserve”

Moral Enhancement and Political Realism

Intelligent Technologies and Lost Life


IEET > Rights > HealthLongevity > ReproRights > Interns > PrivacySurveillance > Enablement > Kristi Scott

Print Email permalink (1) Comments (3986) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg


Truth-telling and Plastic Surgery



Kristi Scott

Dave Ross Show

Posted: Aug 8, 2009


Kristi appeared on Seattle’s Dave Ross show to discuss her JET essay Cheating Darwin: The Genetic and Ethical Implications of Vanity and Cosmetic Plastic Surgery. (MP3)


Listen/View


Print Email permalink (1) Comments (3987) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg


COMMENTS


There are many animals who go through all sorts of displays tricking their mates into thinking they're "hot stuff." Are they cheating Darwin, too? Do we humans have an obligation that they don't?

What got me thinking of this was a letter by a scientist to Nature magazine
(http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v456/n7218/full/456029b.html)
which says:
"Your Editorial 'Handle with care' (Nature 455, 263:264 2008)2 notes that many people define 'nature' as a place without people, and that this would suggest that nature is best protected by keeping humans far away. You question the value of this negative definition, arguing that "if nature is defined as a landscape uninfluenced by humankind, then there is no nature on the planet at all".
This may be true. However, if we define nature as including humankind, the concept becomes so all-encompassing as to be practically useless...
In this case, an atom bomb becomes as 'natural' as an anthill.
A dilemma therefore arises. If nature is somewhere that humans are not, we lose sight of the fact that we are just another species intimately intertwined in the complex web of biological systems on this planet. However, if we place ourselves within a definition of nature, the definition then becomes essentially meaningless by extending to everything on Earth. "



YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: Is a Fascist Movement Emerging in the USA?

Previous entry: Andy Miah, Sports Doping, and the Enhancement Enlightenment

HOME | ABOUT | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter |
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
35 Harbor Point Blvd, #404, Boston, MA 02125-3242 USA
Email: director @ ieet.org