busy"The Ends of the World"
In the stone age,
the end of the world
was all about moving things.
"Put down the rock."
"But I like the rock."
"Put down the rock!"
"But it's sharp and good for hunting."
"Rocks are meant to stay on the ground."
The old world ended, and the new one began.
In the bronze age,
the end of the world
was all about staying put.
"There are animals to hunt."
"Then go hunt them. I'm busy."
"You're always busy now."
"There are plants to sow and metal to dig."
"But that's so slow and boring!"
The old world ended, and the new one began.
In the iron age,
the end of the world
was all about conquering people.
"You'll get yourself killed."
"But war is so exciting!"
"You're going to get lost."
"I'll see new places and meet new people!"
"And kill them."
The old world ended, and the new one began.
In the middle ages,
the end of the world
was all about controlling souls.
"This crusade is a bad idea."
"But they're infidels."
"That doesn't make it a good idea."
"The priest says it is."
"The priest is staying safe in his church!"
The old world ended, and the new one began.
In the industrial age,
the end of the world
was all about building things.
"The power loom will put people out of work."
"There will always be work."
"Say that after they've replaced your job."
"I'll get a new job ... making power looms!"
"Good luck with that."
The old world ended, and the new one began.
In the information age,
the end of the world
was all about knowledge.
"It's a leak!"
"Information wants to be freeeeeee!"
"When I catch you, I will kill you."
"But I erased my trail."
"I am coming for you anyway."
The old world ended, and the new one began.
In the mutation age,
the end of the world
will be all about expanding ourselves.
"You can't change that!"
"Too late. I already did."
"But if you do that, you won't be human anymore!"
...
"Hello?"
The ends of the world are eternally
raveling down one sleeve and
knitting up the other.
July 14 2015, 12:45:13 UTC 5 years ago
But as I said about longevity -- if other people want to change themselves, I'm all for letting them do so. I am not interested in mutating myself, though, and I'm really iffy about most kinds of changing other people without their consent. Although, hypocritically, I'd be in favor of prenatal gengineering for things like editing out cystic fibrosis or Tay-Sachs.
Thoughts
July 15 2015, 02:26:01 UTC 5 years ago
Agreed.
>> Although, hypocritically, I'd be in favor of prenatal gengineering for things like editing out cystic fibrosis or Tay-Sachs. <<
It's normal and necessary for parents to make medical decisions for children until they're old enough to make their own. Changes which improve quality of life by fixing known diseases are generally ethical. Changes to features which do not cause inherent problems, or where the risk may outweigh the benefit, or the benefit is based on social rather than physiological factors, are where it becomes unethical.
A point of contention is that if you throw away things you don't like, some of that may be useful -- like the gene where one copy gives you resistance to malaria, but two cause sickle-cell anemia. But requiring people to live with a disability so that somebody else can benefit is not great either.