Some time ago, I wrote an article about language processing for humans in relation to programming languages. While accurate, I do find it obligatory to write a response to my own article.
My blog usually entails writing about stuff more like Gnome, but today, I can write about real genomes. Recently, the NY Times reported that scientists had found an easy way to slice and edit genes. The same scientists have also started talks in limiting usage of these techniques for fear of their consequences. There are multiple reasons for such limitations, from scientific to social, which I would like to discuss.
In a previous post, I spoke about the nature of the term “right” and why it isn’t the appropriate word for conveying our freedoms and responsibilities we innately believe others should respect. In this post, I continue with that in mind, arguing in favor of privacy but without following the misguided cultural trend of using the word “right”. I begin by listing three types of reasons for privacy, one per section, and conclude with an argument based on my aforementioned article.
Table of Contents
- The Religious Reason – Privacy Stemming from Being a Gift
- The Social Reason – Society and Privacy
- The Personality Reason – Psychological Requirement
- The Right, or Loving, Response – Endowing Privacy
Each section is rather short and should serve to stimulate ideas rather than be a comprehensive proof of the need for privacy.
As a young child growing up, the world is new, and that’s probably the closest most people will ever be to seeing things how they truly are in an objective – as opposed to subjective – sense. That is not to say they will not view things in a subjective sense, only that this is as close as they will be to both the objective perspective and to the unbiased perspective. I refer specifically to the earliest of ages, before one has enough experience to have an opinion.
Man has a problem: He does not know how to value himself.
Oh, I’m so sorry. You were hoping for something that emphasized more of the glamor than the gloom…
Rather than start this post with excuses and a short history of NaNoWriMo or my past at writing, as most bloggers do, allow me to jump right to the details.
Table of Contents
- It Started With Ecumenism
- The New Mind
According to Greek myth, Pandora was given a box by the gods that was full of evil. But Pandora was curious and, in order to satisfy that natural curiosity, opened the box. The literal story may not be a historical event, but it is an analogy for much of human technology. With every new piece of science and technology, we behold at the same time a treasure chest and a Pandora’s box. Both are opened simultaneously. The question we need to ask ourselves is not whether what is inside the treasure chest outweighs the disadvantages of opening the Pandora’s box; the question we need to ask is whether we can bear to live with what is inside that Pandora’s box.
Since I am so adamantly against this game and yet frequently returning to its subculture, I thought I ought to address it. First, to be sure I wasn’t completely blabbering nonsense, I did some research on the Touhou Project at wikia (UPDATE: use this source instead: the Touhou wiki). This post is divided into two large sections: