One has to laugh at such nonsense. Humans can not avoid evil as much as they can’t avoid good. It is like wanting the daylight without the night. Benevolence appears out of the darkest of hours. Poor little bioethicist! I think he wants us to be robots.
We had a similar pill in the army. It was called a "bykom pill" translates into a wake-up pill. It was an ammo case filled with sand that you had to round around carrying all day.
Does a 'morality pill' require 'a God particle'? /sarc
As in politics, hijacked by DIE ideology / critical race theory / xyz "justice," the central needle has drifted ever regressively Leftward in absolute terms, while relatively speaking still claiming a centrist position. So it is with morality, presently a dystopian relativism applauding and enforcing the democide and sickening of millions with experimental useless jabs, terrible policies designed to inflict further harm, an orchestrated plandemic, intentional wilful destruction of societal fabric, economies and lives. Evil is rampant, immorality legion. The 'morality' pill is a misnomer. Crutchfield is obsessed by compliance and the subjugation of dissent
Yep, the biggest problem - define what is moral, or more importantly: WHO defines what is moral? Historically, it was God, but we now live in a post-God age (and even if someone acknowledges God, they no longer seem intent on obeying Him). If you say, "the expert" which one? And if you say the "consensus", when?, because the consensus today if out of fashion tomorrow. And that means there really is a wizard behind the curtain that has to pull levers (media, tech, gov) in order to sway people as to what moral behaviour is (today).
Seems to me that there's an awful lot of madness around at the moment. Particularly amongst the over educated classes - the more of a boffin you are, the madder you seem to be. (Obviously there are all my favourite boffins who don't fall into this category but, then again, they don't come out with this sort of nonsense).
Didn't they used to keep these sort of weirdos locked up in ivory towers rather than actually take any notice of them?
If only it was just Crutchfield. Unfortunately, the bio-ethics sphere is populated with people itching to breach the UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and human rights.
Nick Bostrom at Cambridge University, advocates for a global surveillance state to reduce existential risk.
"Since we shall continue to depend on advanced technology to support a huge and growing human population, we are in need of moral enhancement, by traditional or novel biomedical means, to bring down the risk of ultimate harm".
They are the experts and if they judge the risks to be too high are they are happy to sacrifice your freedom and maybe even your life?
The whole concept is so childish. Our parents spend the first 20 years of our life trying to make us moral, responsible, self-sufficient, ethical and all-round "nicer" to society at large. So ... then the state pops you a pill at regular intervals to top it up? Because ... you're an idiot for your entire life, not to be trusted with decision-making? It's downright laughable.
Philosophers and ethicists, eh? Hard to believe - unless of course you have seen Schwab and his fellow God-wannabes churning out their stuff. Schwab as philosopher is a new take for me, and not one that I think will catch on..... perhaps a pill to cure us of him and his sickness would be more desirable.
You need to read between the lines. While it is true that a real 'morality pill', the kind of they would want and often speak about, is most likely still far away, however, they might try to turn humans into obedient and conformist automatons incapable of dissent and rebellion by reducing their cognitive capabilities and potential by altering, affecting or damaging the brain and neurocircuitry in a particular way. This will be possible thanks to biological injections and injectable devices that are coming. They are already using indirect forms of violence, oppression, and coercion to alter people's behavior and perception of reality, who then end up going against their own self-interests while discarding or erasing common sense and all self-preservation mechanisms that people have at their disposal. China already has a type of 'morality pill' incorporated into their society through education/brainwashing and a social credit system that reinforces and enables certain behaviors, so people are rewarded for punishing dissent, snitching on 'bad people' and those who go against the CCP and the "common good", goals and rules of the society. The worst thing one can do is to get overconfident, disregard their plans, objectives, pursuits, and speculations as silliness, and claim that there is nothing to worry about as no such technology exists and probably will not exist in the future.
New paper from Crutchfield: "The Duty to Edit the Human Germline"
"Many people find the manipulation of the human germline ... to be morally impermissible. In this paper, I argue for the claim that editing the human germline is morally permissible. ... We also have an epistemic duty to gather evidence regarding the effects of editing the human germline which overrides any moral duty to protect future generations."
So cringeworthy indeed! The 1998 film "Disturbing Behavior" comes to mind.
Here is my take from April of last year: Repairing Our Moral Compass and Saving Our World (Casting the Usurpers) https://open.substack.com/pub/lawrencebutts/p/repairing-our-moral-compass-and-saving?r=gjogf&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
One has to laugh at such nonsense. Humans can not avoid evil as much as they can’t avoid good. It is like wanting the daylight without the night. Benevolence appears out of the darkest of hours. Poor little bioethicist! I think he wants us to be robots.
The lunatics in the laboratories are working on the latest see the sun shining out of our lying rs's pill.
We had a similar pill in the army. It was called a "bykom pill" translates into a wake-up pill. It was an ammo case filled with sand that you had to round around carrying all day.
Brilliant article. Thank you.
Does a 'morality pill' require 'a God particle'? /sarc
As in politics, hijacked by DIE ideology / critical race theory / xyz "justice," the central needle has drifted ever regressively Leftward in absolute terms, while relatively speaking still claiming a centrist position. So it is with morality, presently a dystopian relativism applauding and enforcing the democide and sickening of millions with experimental useless jabs, terrible policies designed to inflict further harm, an orchestrated plandemic, intentional wilful destruction of societal fabric, economies and lives. Evil is rampant, immorality legion. The 'morality' pill is a misnomer. Crutchfield is obsessed by compliance and the subjugation of dissent
Yep, the biggest problem - define what is moral, or more importantly: WHO defines what is moral? Historically, it was God, but we now live in a post-God age (and even if someone acknowledges God, they no longer seem intent on obeying Him). If you say, "the expert" which one? And if you say the "consensus", when?, because the consensus today if out of fashion tomorrow. And that means there really is a wizard behind the curtain that has to pull levers (media, tech, gov) in order to sway people as to what moral behaviour is (today).
Seems to me that there's an awful lot of madness around at the moment. Particularly amongst the over educated classes - the more of a boffin you are, the madder you seem to be. (Obviously there are all my favourite boffins who don't fall into this category but, then again, they don't come out with this sort of nonsense).
Didn't they used to keep these sort of weirdos locked up in ivory towers rather than actually take any notice of them?
Crutchfield is immoral - it's as simple as that. Anything covert avoids consent. What a wicked man he must be!
If only it was just Crutchfield. Unfortunately, the bio-ethics sphere is populated with people itching to breach the UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and human rights.
Nick Bostrom at Cambridge University, advocates for a global surveillance state to reduce existential risk.
https://nickbostrom.com/
Julian Savulescu, Oxford BioEthics Guru, advocates culling the immoral:
https://zajednicko.org/mreznabibliografija/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/04/PerssonSavulescu-Unfit-for-the-Future.pdf
"Since we shall continue to depend on advanced technology to support a huge and growing human population, we are in need of moral enhancement, by traditional or novel biomedical means, to bring down the risk of ultimate harm".
They are the experts and if they judge the risks to be too high are they are happy to sacrifice your freedom and maybe even your life?
Martin Neil
The whole concept is so childish. Our parents spend the first 20 years of our life trying to make us moral, responsible, self-sufficient, ethical and all-round "nicer" to society at large. So ... then the state pops you a pill at regular intervals to top it up? Because ... you're an idiot for your entire life, not to be trusted with decision-making? It's downright laughable.
Philosophers and ethicists, eh? Hard to believe - unless of course you have seen Schwab and his fellow God-wannabes churning out their stuff. Schwab as philosopher is a new take for me, and not one that I think will catch on..... perhaps a pill to cure us of him and his sickness would be more desirable.
You need to read between the lines. While it is true that a real 'morality pill', the kind of they would want and often speak about, is most likely still far away, however, they might try to turn humans into obedient and conformist automatons incapable of dissent and rebellion by reducing their cognitive capabilities and potential by altering, affecting or damaging the brain and neurocircuitry in a particular way. This will be possible thanks to biological injections and injectable devices that are coming. They are already using indirect forms of violence, oppression, and coercion to alter people's behavior and perception of reality, who then end up going against their own self-interests while discarding or erasing common sense and all self-preservation mechanisms that people have at their disposal. China already has a type of 'morality pill' incorporated into their society through education/brainwashing and a social credit system that reinforces and enables certain behaviors, so people are rewarded for punishing dissent, snitching on 'bad people' and those who go against the CCP and the "common good", goals and rules of the society. The worst thing one can do is to get overconfident, disregard their plans, objectives, pursuits, and speculations as silliness, and claim that there is nothing to worry about as no such technology exists and probably will not exist in the future.
New paper from Crutchfield: "The Duty to Edit the Human Germline"
"Many people find the manipulation of the human germline ... to be morally impermissible. In this paper, I argue for the claim that editing the human germline is morally permissible. ... We also have an epistemic duty to gather evidence regarding the effects of editing the human germline which overrides any moral duty to protect future generations."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11158-022-09568-x
the morality pill...as vacuous as fu.k/ing for virginity...?