This article is hands down an "ethical minefield" as the article states. The whole idea of a "mind meld" and brain to brain sharing sounds straight of science fiction. Like all scientific discoveries, I'm sure this could benefit many, and help mankind to further understand science and the world around us. However, the idea of meld several brains together to perform things that a single brain couldn't sounds like an episode of one of my favorite shows, Doctor Who. In the episode, all people are plugged into a computer and together share all knowledge and are extremely intelligent. However, this is not a future I really want. Thinking along the story lines of Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, just because you CAN do something, does it mean you should? And this, in it of itself, is the argument against nearly everything that has been discovered or researched in science, ever. Every discovery has both a plus and negative. Take nuclear energy, for instance. Obviously nuclear weapons such as the A-bomb are an extreme negative, wasting human life and causing social and political problems. However, nuclear energy is an amazing discovery that has led to many others, and furthered our understanding of the atom. So my question to you is, where do you side on this research, future downfall of society, or amazing discovery that will lead to our enhanced knowledge of medicine and the human brain?
No comments:
Post a Comment