[ExI] Stem cell breakthrough
atymes at gmail.com
Wed Feb 5 00:18:03 UTC 2014
On Feb 4, 2014 3:56 AM, "Ben Zaiboc" <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com>wrote:
> >Problem is, try to actually design and build the modular architecture you
> >are talking about, of equal range of functions as the human body, and
> >it running for many years without high maintenance. It is not as easy as
> >you imagine.
> >And then there is the problem of moving people from their current bodies
> >this new architecture.
> >Replacing organs individually looks to be a lot more achievable. If done
> >for all or most organs, in theory it even yields the same end result.
> I don't imagine it will be easy, far from it, I'm well aware that it'll
be very difficult. What I am claiming is that it will be worthwhile.
There would be benefit, true. What is being questioned is whether there
would be more benefits for the same cost than could be had by upgrading the
current infrastructure, organ by organ.
Besides, if we are redoing the entire body plan, why stick with an organic
body? There are stronger things that can be made to self-heal.
> And it doesn't represent an upgrade path.
Actually it does.
> This is supposed to be the Extropians list, not the
Let's-Keep-Things-The-Same, Nature-Knows-Best list.
And this is the Extropians list. But even here, we compare alternatives
and promote that which works best.
> This is probably one of the very few places I could say this, but
stem-cell therapy strikes me as a conservative, limited and temporary
solution to the problem of ageing bodies. They are a useful component,
yes, but not a complete solution in themselves.
True. But we have to start somewhere...and even if the redesign you
propose turns out to be the best solution, the path to it likely leads
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat