At which point do you think it would be immoral for humans to continue to exist?

[MORBIDYAM]

I've been thinking about how much technology is advancing and about Bush torturing people. And I realize that probably humans will be able to create a machine that adds vast folds of brain tissue for the sole purpose of making people feel pain in an infinitely more excruciating manner.

Currently every torture method known to man kind eventually reaches a point where nerve cells get numb and are thus unable to continue feeling pain both emotionally and physically. But if never cells could be tweaked to feel more and more pain and a vastly greater mass in the brain devoted to feeling pain, you could effectively keep people in states of pain currently unimaginable to even the person who has suffered the worst in human history.

So my thought is that if such a machine comes into existence, if even one person is put through it they might be able to feel more pain than everyone who has ever lived on the planet combined in 1 second or less. Thus I believe it would be immoral for the human race to continue to exist if even one person would be the victim of such a machine, as it would redefine pain to that person in orders of magnitude more than anyone has ever dealt with on earth.

So I'm just curious at what point you guys think it would be too immoral for human beings to exist?

[Atlassmurf]

When Obama becomes president?

Nah, for me that would be the part where they torture they're own species, put thousands of animals in little cages, have the stuff to destroy the world and stop producing milk. Yes, it is true. Milk saves the world.

[Ummagumma]

Oh, don't worry - if the need arises, the consensus of morality will shift. We're here for the duration, and will continue to do nothing but 'Good Things®'.

[Dayman]

So I'm just curious at what point you guys think it would be too immoral for human beings to exist?

Morality is a tricky thing - and since morality is based on our interactions and dealings with other people (sentient beings), I'd think it'd be a tad bit immoral to eliminate them all.

What it comes down to is that each and everyone's right to exist and be happy is paramount. If one person's right is violated even to that unfathomable degree, no one has to the right to deny me my rights to existence and happiness because of that.

[sirfiggin]

I'd have to agree with Atlassmurf.Not about Obama, but the rest of it.

[roy34543]

Never, One ounce of happiness anywhere is enough to counterbalance all the misery of the world.

[Ex Tenebris Lux]

I've been thinking about how much technology is advancing and about Bush torturing people. And I realize that probably humans will be able to create a machine that adds vast folds of brain tissue for the sole purpose of making people feel pain in an infinitely more excruciating manner.

this is where your thread fails. this is where your intellect fails.

[Каие]

It would be immoral for is to exist when we declare ourselves to be wrong and attempt to genetically or technologically horribly modify ourselves in a vain attempt at perfection a bit like BioShock game.

[MORBIDYAM]

this is where your thread fails. this is where your intellect fails.

Well I don't want to get into the technical details of such a thing but I really don't see how it is improbable for this to happen at some point. We know that when we lose a sense the area in the brain devoted to that sense is divided up amongst the other senses. Thus I do not see how it is ridiculously hard to imagine someone sociopath finding a way to increase the amount of tissue in the part of the brain that is responsible for pain and increase it.

In the 90's most people couldn't even conceive that such a thing as an iphone would ever come into existence not to mention cameras that can now recognize faces.

Never, One ounce of happiness anywhere is enough to counterbalance all the misery of the world.

I disagree, if I am going through a feeling 10000x being crucified every second of 50 years and I am given a pause to look at my facebook and I see that I am rated #18th most cuddly then I go back to my torture for another 50 years I would say that my ratio of happiness/pain is less than 1 and thus it would have been better had I never been born from a purely mathematical standpoint and from an emotional standpoint most assuredly better if I had never been born.

[The Good]

Unfortunately, all humans are immoral one way or another. There is little we could do except strive to become better people every day.

[HansDuet]

In no point.

[The Good]

In no point.

What do you mean? Were you replying to my post?

[HansDuet]

What do you mean? Were you replying to my post?

No I was replying to the question this thread asks.

I mean, how can existing be "immoral"? Rubbish.

[gambit]

Never. Only if mankind as a complete and utter whole turned evil would it be time, and not only do I believe in second chances, every single person is innocent when born. There is no such thing as an evil baby and that is simply enough to redeem a whole peoples.

[Ex Tenebris Lux]

Never. Only if mankind as a complete and utter whole turned evil would it be time, and not only do I believe in second chances, every single person is innocent when born. There is no such thing as an evil baby and that is simply enough to redeem a whole peoples.

+rep

[Gigantus]

Maybe I am simplifying the matter: by the time you make use of this 'invention' the thought of being 'immoral' will most likely be obsolete\unthinkable.
Which brings me back to the label "immoral". Considering that showing naked legs was considered immoral some time in the 18th century one has to conclude that it is a matter of perception and peer pressure that creates that label. Which brings me back to my statement at the top.
Maybe we should discuss what "immoral" actually means. Praying for the safe return of soldiers in a non-defensive war?

[Steel of Fury]

Aren't men immoral enough already?

[Gigantus]

Somebody explain the concept of "immoral" to me please! We are all talking about it, but can anybody explain it to me without being judgemental?

[whhyy]

When we are all blind, deaf, unable to feel, and paralyzed.

[Gigantus]

Found this in dictionary.com:

Violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics.

From this follows: ethics change = principle changes = view of what is immoral changes
Guess I made my point?