This has been on my mind for a while, so I’ll just run it by you guys.
TLDR:I think we( humanity) should at least try to solve all the worlds problems with science and technology. I know that the scientific methods have it’s limitation; I also entertain the real possibility that science can’t solve all of our problems. However, I think we( humanity) should at least try to use science to solve all of it’s problem.
If science and technology can’t solve all our problems, I don’t know what will. I could be wrong but, it seems that all the other solutions to life’s problems have already been explored by philosophy and religion. From my perspective, non-scientific solutions are only temporary solutions to problems that will otherwise still persist. Despite it’s flaws, only the advances in science and technology have brought anything new to the table. I think that they’re too many disputes surrounding, what is a problem and whether or not we should use science to address. Before, I talked about how I want their to be a cure for aging. It wouldn’t be a cure for death and it wouldn’t stop people from growing up( which is different from aging). All it would do is make sure that a person could stay in their 20’s indefinitely, on a biological level. People would still die; it just won’t be from natural causes( or at least natural causes related to aging).
I know that they’re actually scientist are working on this issue but, it seems that the whole ethical debate is holding back. More religious people would say that we don’t need a cure for aging as there is an afterlife waiting for us all( though a cure for aging won’t be a cure for death). Less religious people might say that curing aging would exacerbate a supposed overpopulation problem. I’d say that people would just reproduce less if they were to live longer and( as I’ve already stated) curing aging isn’t a cure for death.
There is also this other concern that only the rich would benefit from curing aging. Well, that could be said for most technologies; the rich benefited from them first. There was a time when only the rich could avoid a cellphone. Even if this technology were to only benefit the rich, I think it would eventually benefit everyone else. Also the only reason why the technology would benefit the rich first, is because only few people care about care about curing aging. If scientist working on a cure for aging want support, they’ll just have to get it from rich people.
If most people weren’t so against change, the whole issue of rich people benefiting from it first might not even be an issue. Even though most people are poor as individuals, we are still rich as a group( or at least rich enough). Until most people want to support a cure for aging, only a few rich folks will have to found it.
I know I’ve gone on about curing aging for a good while but, I hope that doesn’t distract from the overall point I’m trying to make. I only brought up curing aging as it’s the least polarizing example I could think of; it’s also the one I think about the most. So what do you guys think?
