3 ms·
If you want to take my arguments as extolling murder, that's on you buddy. I'm arguing for nonintervention, based on the precautionary principle. This technol
by BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
If you want to take my arguments as extolling murder, that's on you buddy. I'm arguing for nonintervention, based on the precautionary principle. This technology has substantial potential for social harm and should not be pursued until all of those concerns are addressed.
- ben_w 5y ago> I'm arguing for nonintervention, based on the precautionary principle. That’s fine, but not what you wrote before. > This technology has substantial potential for social harm Yup, like everything. > and should not be pursued until all of those concerns are addressed. Nope. Because death itself has direct harm — indeed, it is widely regarded as the either the worst or among the worst things one person can do to another — the burden of proof is on those who say it would be bad to delay death as much as possible. I mean, we already delay death as much as possible with all kinds of medical interventions.