CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:2
Arguments:1
Total Votes:2
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Let's discuss Humans as Organic Machines (1)

Debate Creator

ThePyg(6745) pic



Let's discuss Humans as Organic Machines

Alright, so today's 4/20 and I was looking through my argument feed and was like "o.O... I'll worry about that later."  So instead of all the really long arguments with lots of interesting points that I don't want to shift through right now, I instead want to get your thoughts on how I view people:

Baically, I see them as a pool of some crazy shit that happens to function properly.  When you see humans with disorders, I just think of them as machines with defective parts.  Depending on the severity of the defectiveness, you'd choose on whether to throw it away or try and fix it.  With humans, I find it interesting how defective they have to be to even be considered too broken to try to fix.  

Consider a computer with a motherboard that is completely fried, and the CPU has been completely wiped and corroted.  Most of us would decide to just throw the computer away instead of buying parts to replace it. 

This goas for a lot of shit.  But with humans, we will consider throwing them away the final option (in most cases).  I saw someone with a lazy eye and thought of them as a robot with a broken photon capturer.  It looks weird, but it still gets the job done (just to a limited extent).  

Here's the main thing, though:  As a society, are we reaching the point of treating humans like objects instead of individuals?  If humans serve to benefit society, what happens with humans who end up being a burden or a harm to society instead of an asset?  Are individuals more important or is society?

Add New Argument
2 points

Here's the main thing, though: As a society, are we reaching the point of treating humans like objects instead of individuals? If humans serve to benefit society, what happens with humans who end up being a burden or a harm to society instead of an asset? Are individuals more important or is society?

This is the difference between humane governments, which the Western world claims to be, and the animalistic ruling systems that we saw hundreds of years ago. I don't think we're anywhere near it yet, but in many ways it's coming closer. I think a truly efficient society must do this, but they would have lost the real benefit of society in doing so: improving the lives of everyone in the group.

Yes, there may be individuals who bring problems with them, and this can cause problems to society (either the unemployed, or as you put it, those with broken parts). However, in the interest of equality and justice, I support Rawls' position, in that development of legislation, all should be blind to their own positions, and only from behind this veil of ignorance can people truly plan objective and equal laws. I can not imagine anyone supporting the killing off of the weak, when they do not know where they will be in society.

2 years ago | Side: Let's discuss Humans as Organic Machines


About CreateDebate
The CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Help/FAQ
Newsletter Archive
Sharing Tools
Invite Your Friends
Bookmarklets
Partner Buttons
RSS & XML Feeds
Reach Out
Advertise
Contact Us
Report Abuse
Twitter
Basic Stuff
User Agreement
Privacy Policy
Sitemap
Creative Commons
©2014 TidyLife, Inc. All Rights Reserved. User content, unless source quoted, licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Debate Forum | Big shout-outs to The Bloggess and Andy Cohen.