> Is memory of the event enough to cause guilt?
> It is an implanted memory programmed into it during creation.
>
This raises an interesting point. What is the PURPOSE of establishing guilt?
Interestingly, in Shawn's original post he inquired into the concept of
"punishment" -a hot topic in debate circles. But the list did not pick up
that thread.
Culpablitity means one has been rendered "harmful" and punishment attempts to
repair and pervent further harm. Is it even effective? Can preventative
measures be more effective?
> Is capability of murder enough for guilt?
> Who is not capable of knifing some one?
This raises another ETHICS question: Do you past experiences make you what
you are?
(One comes upon this question when confronted with the OJ trials.)
Most people would fear a known killer, they would judge him capable of
repeating the act - even expect it in some.
Re: the last question:Many are capable, should we punish them before they do
it? Many are not, should we punish them anyway ( in a sense we are, because
we all pay heavily for jails, lawyers and police systems)? Are you suggesting
original sin?
; - )
GC
( And again, since cloning , not replication, is the technology at hand, and
genomes don't come equipped with implanted memories, this 'identical copy'
thread - re; cloning anyway, is a fun but 'mental' masterbation?? ; )