THINGS THAT MAKE YOU THINK “AS IN THE DAYS OF NOAH…”
This story was noticed and shared by several of you - W.G., D.C., S.D. and a few others, with our thanks - and it's another reminder that the scientismists, technocrats, and so-called "ethicists", running (and ruining) this civilization have little to no humanity or human empathy. In fact, the story reminds me, again, of a certain novel of C.S. Lewis that I've often mentioned in recent blogs, and that I will mention again.
The version of the story that I want to focus on for the purpose of this blog is the version shared by W.G., as it brings together all the elements - soulless "ethicists" and technocrats ensconced in the halls of quackademia asserting their considered scientismistic opinion that "boyoids" will feel no pain - into one miserific transhumanist vision of the bright and endless vista of virtual immortality that will be visited on all who can afford it:
Notice all the propatainment techniques at work just in the headline and subtitle alone: beginning the whole headline with the phrase "ethically sourced", then immnediately following that, the introduction of what is supposedly "ethical", namely the "spare human bodies" and then the supporting "argument" that all of this would reduce the reliance on animal testing, improve the development of new drugs, &c &c blah blah blah. Here they missed a golden opportunity, for they might have mentioned that such "bodyoids" would have eliminated the need for the covert op called the planscamdemic in order to test their potions on human subjects under the guise of government and corporate mandates to get jabbed with the potion or else lose your job. No planscamdemic necessary if only we had a decent supply of bodyoids to test our concoctions on!
Isn't transhumanist technocracy and scientism wonderful? And notice, we're not even past the headline yet. The opening paragraph of the "op-ed" article is - as we say here - a whopper doozie, and is followed by two more paragraphs that are themselves whopper doozies:
Why do we hear about medical breakthroughs in mice, but rarely see them translate into cures for human disease? Why do so few drugs that enter clinical trials receive regulatory approval? And why is the waiting list for organ transplantation so long? These challenges stem in large part from a common root cause: a severe shortage of ethically sourced human bodies.
It may be disturbing to characterize human bodies in such commodifying terms, but the unavoidable reality is that human biological materials are an essential commodity in medicine, and persistent shortages of these materials create a major bottleneck to progress.
This imbalance between supply and demand is the underlying cause of the organ shortage crisis, with more than 100,000 patients currently waiting for a solid organ transplant in the US alone. It also forces us to rely heavily on animals in medical research, a practice that can’t replicate major aspects of human physiology and makes it necessary to inflict harm on sentient creatures. (Emphasis added)
Pay attention to that argument for why we need "bodyoids": we could stop doing harm to sentient creatures, i.e., animals, in pharmaceutical and medical research; we''ll get back to that in a moment. Then comes the argument for "bodyoids":
There might be a way to get out of this moral and scientific deadlock. Recent advances in biotechnology now provide a pathway to producing living human bodies without the neural components that allow us to think, be aware, or feel pain. Many will find this possibility disturbing, but if researchers and policymakers can find a way to pull these technologies together, we may one day be able to create “spare” bodies, both human and nonhuman.
There might be a "catch", however:
Of course, exciting possibilities are not certainties. We do not know whether the embryo models recently created from stem cells could give rise to living people or, thus far, even to living mice. We do not know when, or whether, an effective technique will be found for successfully gestating human bodies entirely outside a person. We cannot be sure whether such bodyoids can survive without ever having developed brains or the parts of brains associated with consciousness, or whether they would still serve as accurate models for living people without those brain functions.
And that, I submit, is the "catch", the big fat ugly moral and physiological problem squatting in the middle of this otherwise thoroughly disgusting proposal. Despite the attempts to appear "reasonable" and "concerned" about human sensibilities about the proposal, I'm not buying it. This is, after all, an American quackademy, and one of the leading quackademic institutes for scientism and technocracy. The piece is not really an op-ed piece; it's a narrative preparation piece. What it is talking about has probably already covertly been done. What it really appears to be trying to do is to reassure everyone that "they" are confident their "bodyoids" can feel and experience no pain.
In other words, the article and all its premises are based upon the implicit assumption that "they" have figured out consciousness, and that its root and basis exists in the brain and the nervous system. Remove these, and one can have "non-person" bodyoids that can be bought and sold as a commodity. These two implicit assumptions undergird the whole nauseating article and proposal.
Call me old fashioned, a Luddite, a curmudgeon, a dogmatist, a relic from the by-gone age of faith, a traditionalist, call me whatever epithet or name you wish. But the bottom line is: the mystery of human consciousness has not ever been adequately fastened down. Remember the case in France of a man lacking almost 97% of the mass of a normal brain. He experienced pain, functioned, had emotions, and so on. We all know of the cases of coma victims with no brain function, waking up and telling everyone that they heard and saw them, when scientism said such things were impossible. And then, on top of all of this, to turn life into a commodity.
So, not only "no" but a firm and unequivocal NO! I do not want to be the guinea pig in your experiments: I do not want your potions, concoctions , philtres, tinctures, and elixirs, made from the harvested body parts of humans, whether grown in "bodyoids" or not. I do not want a transplanted organ from some luckless individual grown in a vat at MIT, which assures me it experienced no pain or suffering to supply whatever "replacement part" I might need. Trust these people to stop there?
Ausgeschlossen!
It is worth reminding ourselves what sorts of people they are: in the name of science they will commit all sorts of atrocities; think only of the camp "doctors" in Nazi Germany. Think only of Dr. Fausti, torturing beagles in Tunisia. And now they want to grow monsters in a vat without brains or nerves and reassure us that it is a new path forward.
Not only NO, but HELL NO, because that is indeed what they are advocating: Hell, the Hell of C.S. Lewis' That Hideous Strength, that promises "immortality" by an endless supply of replaceable body parts, beginning with the severed head of a guillotined French murderer.
See you on the flip side...
(If you enjoyed today's blog, please share with your friends.)
No comments:
Post a Comment