tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657450053451704408.post7196337790726961916..comments2023-09-29T22:23:11.739+10:00Comments on ANYTHING BUT HUMAN: Human?Julie Joy Clarkehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01494942281316667133noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657450053451704408.post-22817544986810773602010-11-05T07:59:09.396+11:002010-11-05T07:59:09.396+11:00Agree - but it is the inconsistency between the de...Agree - but it is the inconsistency between the desire to preserve some lives and the easy disposal of others (Tyler Cassidy is just a recent example that comes to mind) that really disturbs.<br />Apart from that, I was mostly interested in the fact that the surgeon was grappling with the notion of what is human - the baby's human form didn't seem as important to him as its future state of being ~ indeed, his description of what is human - hear/speak/participate in society, are attributes we might use to describe a functioning robot. His description, ie, lack of an ability to participate appeared to position the baby outside humanity. Utilitarianism certainly reigns supreme here. Think of all the non-functioning humans (those on life-support or in intensive care) and the 'lively machines' (Haraway)that co-inhabit our society. <br />Which reminds me - I recently saw an interview with Robin Williams, who is only alive now because he has a bovine valve in his heart.Julie Joy Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01494942281316667133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657450053451704408.post-10882275360797746602010-11-04T21:21:33.679+11:002010-11-04T21:21:33.679+11:00Again you draw attention to the disconnect between...Again you draw attention to the disconnect between individual and collective action in modern times. Where the state is expected to behave rationally, predictably, cautiously and consistently, individuals are not, especially in matters of faith.<br /><br />There is perhaps no historical precedent for individual freedom on such a scale as we now experience. Where individual life was cheap once, so long as the state was preserved, now it is not, even when the state is at risk. The state, and its functionaries, are expected at all costs to preserve individual life. The outstanding exceptions (war, police shootings) are hotly contested in ways unimaginable a century ago. In the UK most doctors and hospitals belong to the state. Simply put, a state that allowed babies to die would itself pass on. Unwilling to do so most modern states than can do act to preserve life, no matter what the cost.<br /><br />Perhaps the disconnect is not so much a sign of failure as of unfamiliarity. A state behaving as a person might is entirely new, and error prone. That alone should arouse some caution, because where the state gets to define not only the boundaries of human conduct but of human life, humanism ends and utilitarianism begins.stevehttp://home.vicnet.net.au/~stevemnoreply@blogger.com