Scientists create animals that are part-human - Stem Cell Research - MSNBC.com
Science continues to challenge the cultural assumptions of humans about their centrality in the vast scheme of nature. Although some long ago realized that we are but a small part of a massive evolutionary phenomenon, some will continue to cling to the uniqueness of man's sentience on Earth as proof that man must always hold that claim; such a belief is unwarranted.
We ourselves are beginning to create our own versions of 'life', in artificial intelligence, and in the biological sciences. This article talks about animals that combine human and other-than-human cells in one organism, and their ethical implications.
Although we can't deny or stop such progress, we must consider how to properly fit it in to our ethical frameworks. The following quote from the above article strikes me as a slightly less-than-optimal way to handle the problem of sentient mice...
Stanford law professor Hank Greely, who chaired the ethics committee, said the board was satisfied that the size and shape of the mouse brain would prevent the human cells from creating any traits of humanity. Just in case, Greely said, the committee recommended closely monitoring the mice’s behavior and immediately killing any that display human-like behavior. (emphasis added.)
Here is a great interview on Salon of Richard Dawkins, author of many books on evolution and the problems with religion. I agree with the vast majority of his statements, but do disagree that religion serves no good -- it has served as an important social support and has provided a means to channel some people into more productive pursuits than they would otherwise have entered into. I have not read his works, but now I plan to...
Nonetheless, these functions could and should be provided by a philosophy with scientific foundations rather than by faith in things that have no scientific foundation. In other words, these functions should be provided by philosophical frameworks that, even if they take advantage of similar methodologies, such as self-hypnosis or faith, do so consciously and openly, and promote an evolutionary and science-based understanding of life.
I also disagree with his seeming belief that without religion, most disputes would be amicably disposed of. Although many disputes are caused by or exacerbated by dogmatic faith, there are other reasons, rational reasons, to fight and have wars as well.
A quote from the article, noting the obvious:
Bush and bin Laden are really on the same side: the side of faith and violence against the side of reason and discussion. Both have implacable faith that they are right and the other is evil. Each believes that when he dies he is going to heaven. Each believes that if he could kill the other, his path to paradise in the next world would be even swifter.