From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@optusnet.com.au)
Date: Tue May 06 2003 - 06:01:39 MDT
Anders writes:
> A new journal attempting "to probe and analyze the social
> and ethical issues raised by technological progress":
> http://www.thenewatlantis.com/index.html
>
> I think it is important. It shows that the stuff we usually
> discuss now have reached the (conservative) intelligentia,
> and the discussion of posthuman nature now can be done
> in all seriousness.
True. And it would seem with some urgency. I have/had found
time to read only part of what Leon Kass has to say in the article
you cited and in his role as Chair of the Presidents Council
on Bioethics in the paper relating to stem cells.
I think it would be a dangerous mistake to regard the likes of
Kass as a lightweight. There are apparently some pretty serious
careers to be made by "bioethicists" like Kass (and writers like
Crichton) collecting dollars and kudos by playing on prejudices
and fears.
It is not like one can take on someone like Kass intellectually
and politically and expect a level playing field. To persuade
politically two things need to be achieved. First you need to
hold the attention of the audience (the listeners, the voters,
the policy setters) long enough for them to consider what your
saying and *then* you have to persuade them. It does no
good to just intellectually outscore Kass on debating points
only to find that no-one is listening anymore anyway.
Unfortunately until the ordinary man and woman in the street
starts to sense that the issues (stem cells, gene therapy, cryonics,
whatever) are not *just* esoterics but that they will in fact have
some personal effect on them and in a timeframe soon enough for
them to care about, the problem is not just in winning the debate
intellectually (though that still has to happen), the real problem is
in holding the attention of the audience whose votes will set the
policy in the first place. On a superficial hearing a guy like Kass
can sound stoic and noble. Historically dying with grace and
dignity (because you were going to anyway) was often seen as
the better alternative than dying without it. Unfortunately its often
the superficial level that folks vote on.
Brett
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 06 2003 - 06:23:45 MDT