Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,209,254 members, 8,005,431 topics. Date: Monday, 18 November 2024 at 12:47 AM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable (3941 Views)
Noise Pollution: Man Storms Neighboring Church With His Dogs To Warn Them (vid) / Parable Of The Rich Man And Lazarus: What Was The Sin Of The Rich Man? / Bible Parable And Sermon: The Prodigal Son and what it really means (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (Reply) (Go Down)
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 10:55pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
budaatum:Muttley laughs though not because Muttley is funny but hey bud, please, you too have joined gang, bastardising the best language in the world Was the apostrophe necessary in that remark? Or is it a case of being borne out of an aesthetic pleasure? 1 Like |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 11:43pm On Sep 05, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff:I did consider 'oun ro e', but generally find that tedious. I'm looking for refination to the written Yoruba, currently considering abandoning the search for the undercented e and o even, which is almost sacrilegious! I'll work on the apostrophe too as I really hate it! |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 8:31am On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:I do not mean to be rude Buda, but the moniker deserve the harsh word. Subject to scientific experimentation. color=#770077]The 10 points constituted the "Nuremberg Code," which includes such principles as informed consent and absence of coercion; properly formulated scientific experimentation; and beneficence towards experiment participants. It is thought to have been mainly based on the Hippocratic Oath, which was interpreted as endorsing the experimental approach to medicine while protecting the patient.[/color]Not really Buda, when you read the first two and the number four code. It state that "" Required is the voluntary, well-informed, understanding consent of the human subject in a full legal capacity."" ""The experiment should aim at positive results for society that cannot be procured in some other way."" ""The experiment should be set up in a way that avoids unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injuries, except, in experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.. The first two and the four code clearly state that human can be subject into any condition of scientific experiment if the victim in question Cleary agree with it. Emphasis on the bolded.. But it beg another philosophical question, do rat or mouse use mostly in scientific experiment willingly submit to this . It is ethical as well to use our nearest cousin as experiment when it's against their wish..do science really needs to consider this phenomenon. You see that is why today some big wings in political arena ( especially in Germany) require scientists to document and justify why an experiment is necessary even if it will be carry out on rat. They also have the right to live. Science is less concerned about this but the actual result which is the knowledge. Well, i Know harming humans in an experiment or doing something that is likely to harm them, is obviously perceived to be unethical by most people, i also go further by saying harming animal too like rat is also unethical .but with this idea , science progress will definitely slow down and many deases that should be eliminated will triumph. But i say when the subjects are aware, the situation is much more difference, so again the question raised ealier, how are will going to make other animal aware? For example as you stated earlier , Medical experiments on Jews by Nazis? Obviously not ethical. Drug experiments on desperate cancer patients with a new experimental drug, with unknown side effects, Arguably ethical. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 10:59am On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:No, not any! What you describe there is what caused the Nuremberg Code to be created, and to stop the above! Since then, scientific experiment must be ethically accepted and ethically administered, so hardly "any condition of scientific experiment", even if the "victim in question" agrees. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 11:13am On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: I believe these are properly answered in the OP.
LoL, how very Machiavellian, by inference I take it you subscribe to Machiavelli's principles. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 11:18am On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:There are no ethics broken if the participant was fully aware of the risks and benefits involved. As the same to any surgery case on a pregnant woman or any emergency that a patient can experience, what is the most important is signing the informed consent paper before every operation. This includes every study, as well. This is what Nuremberg code emphasis I believe that ethical experiences can go both way too perhaps. When a study is being performed and digging into subjective data to collect credible information to use in evidence based research, one has to reflect if that information is being created, purposely developed, or consciously manifested to actually throw off the results? Is it falsified or valid? Only the subject or participant could know. Although, What I see that maybe consider unfair or unethical,it is the participant case who surely can have great fun while doing this and change the roles where participant becomes researcher and researcher become the actual participants, even without their knowledge the entire time. Awareness has it’s fascinating results and amusing experience(s).which can go both way to either ethical or unethical related experiment. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 11:54am On Sep 06, 2018 |
LordReed:I'll let you off with the first two questions, the third question however wasnt in anyway addressed in the OP Machiavelli might have some principles similar to mine |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 12:02pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:The experiment must be ethically acceptable and the experimenter must follow ethical procedures otherwise ethics are broken. You can't just perform any experiment you want even if the person performed on knows the risks and benefits involved and wants you to. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 12:05pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:clinical trials bro.. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 12:08pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: It was by inference because he was powerful and controlled the city, he says the dogs shouldn't be killed.
Wow, thats interesting to note. So I take it you do not believe in an objective morality? |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 12:29pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
LordReed:So, if as you now claiming, it is inferred in the OP, that the people were warned about the dogs, especially the alpha male dog, why then didn't the people take heed of the scientist's warning? I also am interested in knowing how and what the scientist warned them about. Lastly, what is objective morality? |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 12:35pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: They were warned not to kill the dogs. Lastly, what is objective morality? The idea that morality is inherent in the universe, that in any situation it will either be always true or always false. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 12:39pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:There are many ethical codes that clinical trials must very strictly adhere to. A short list would include the Nuremberg Code (1947), Declaration of Helsinki (2000), Belmont Report (1979), CIOMS (2002) and U.S. Common Rule (1991). Sourced from the NIH Clinical Center |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 12:46pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:Good, go thru those code and you will still see it validate Nuremberg code of 1, 2 And 4. In addition, the idea of informed consent has been universally accepted and now constitutes Article 7 of the United Nations' ""International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It also served as the basis for International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects proposed by the World Health Organization"" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Ethical_Guidelines_for_Biomedical_Research_Involving_Human_Subjects |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 12:56pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:Do we agree that all clinical research must adhere to certain ethics as stated in the codes provided, and that no clinical research can legally be performed without considering the ethics involved? |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 12:56pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
LordReed:1/ Why would the scientist warn them against killing the dogs? 2/ Did the scientist, at all, warn them the dogs will kill them? 3/ Was there anything in the line of the people being told "kill or be killed"? LordReed:Break it down for a two year old to understand this |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 1:00pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: You know that parables are meant to be short right?
For example, if you kill you are wrong, doesn't matter what the situation. BTW are you 2 yrs old? LoLz 1 Like |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 1:07pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:my argument is ethics or no ethics, so far the patient consent is attested, the experiment can be carry out. And Nuremberg code of 1, 2 And 4 confirm it which can be found in other code. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 1:23pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:The Nuremberg Code does not state that any experiment can be performed if the patient gives consent! You can't even carry out any experiment you want on a rat that is considered incapable of giving consent, so how the heck can you be limiting ethics to consent? The use of animals in research should evolve out of a strong sense of ethical self-examination. Ethical self-examination involves a careful self-analysis of one's own personal and scientific motives. Moreover, it requires a recognition of animal suffering and a satisfactory working through of that suffering in terms of one's ethical values. John P. Gluck; Ethics and Behavior, Vol. 1, 1991 The link I provided specifically states seven main principles described as guiding the conduct of ethical research, of which 'consent', an ethical consideration itself, 'informed' at that, is but one: Social and clinical value Scientific validity Fair subject selection Favorable risk-benefit ratio Independent review Informed consent Respect for potential and enrolled subjects If the above list stated "consent" alone, it still means ethics is of significance. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 1:27pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
LordReed:You know parables are lessons and are quizzed for clarity, right? LordReed:I am pleased I asked you so grateful for your example and teeny weeny explanation. Well, if with that example, that is what objective morality is, then I don't buy that. Where and/or how does incest, during its passage in time, fall with you? No, I am not 2 years old, but I know that if you are unable to explain a thing enough well for a two years old to understand, you really then don't know anything about what you are talking about |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 1:52pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: Not really. It'll be like me asking why in the parable of the sower that Jesus told, the sower did not weed the ground or provide fertilizer or put the plants in a greenhouse to prevent the sun from destroying the crops. All of that is extraneous to the idea being passed across as it is not a complete representation of reality. I am pleased I asked you so grateful for your example and teeny weeny explanation. This explains a lot about your views, quite different from the usual religious person. Incest may have been necessary at some point in human history, maybe not parent-offspring or offspring-offspring type but some of the closer relations we may object to today, aunty-nephew for instance. For the survival of the human species or society at the time it may be considered moral but now we have a luxury in the sheer amount of diversity when it comes to who to mate with, it is unnecessary to indulge in incest. Indeed I would call it immoral, simply because there is no need for it and it may cause harm. No, I am not 2 years old, Dude, it was a joke. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 2:03pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:Not only does it state that, it also emphasis on the consent! Code 1 of Nuremberg is an evidence. You can't even carry out any experiment you want on a rat that is considered incapable of giving consent, so how the heck can you be limiting ethics to consent?That is why i raised a philosophical question on how do we determine if rat is willingly to undergo scientific experiment we subject them to. I further clarify that some big wings in political arena(Germany) Are advocating where scientist needs to give details of what the experiment is always about before such trials can be do done while some opposition are claiming if it is done in such way always it will slow down scientific progress. [ i]The use of animals in research should evolve out of a strong sense of ethical self-examination. Ethical self-examination involves a careful self-analysis of one's own personal and scientific motives. Moreover, it requires a recognition of animal suffering and a satisfactory working through of that suffering in terms of one's ethical values.[/i]first what gives human the right to test on a defenseless animal, if not egocentric....i wonder what it is ? Well the same way we have no qualms eating other species of birds and animals, it clearly shows we really don't regard killing them as an issue of ethics. As egocentric is embedded on us. The fact is that whether we are curious about how a new drug may work on humans or how we may survive outer space, our collective mentality comes from the curiosity that separates us from most other animals - the need to know how things work. We would kill not just to eat, but dissect animals to get a good idea what's inside them and hence, probably inside us. It's just in our nature to be egocentric. Humanity is about surviving and is ready to do anything for such. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 2:16pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:And this, 'egocentric', is the reason why there are ethical standards that apply to clinical research! We refuse to allow your egocentric nature the freedom to do as it might like! The imposition of ethical standards is how we reign your egocentric nature in. Please be aware, not all humans have an "egocentric nature" as such. Some, do not place their ego at the forefront when taking decisions. And the ego definitely mustn't be a consideration in clinical research as the seven main principles clearly show. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 2:21pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:Nothing gives humans the right to "test on a defenseless animal". You know what we are like acting like gods and assuming? So ethical standards are imposed to limit that "right". At least, to impose standards you must adhere to and limit what you can do under your assumed " right". |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 2:45pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:what is the essence of ethics that regard consent even when experimentental procedure is way risky? That is even the reasons the standard are not yet implemented or allowed in any country. Well it is still regarded as one of the most brillant idea ever created in medical research. It is still a big debate anyway. Please be aware, not all humans have an "egocentric nature" as such. Some, do not place their ego at the forefront when taking decision Humans revolve around themselves...it's a survival trait...in a live or die situation, it's everyone for himself...and those very few who do not, are not the survival exception, if they choose to die to save someone else, it will be because they chose their survival. To extend their survival possibilities humans became social, gathered in groups, being stronger as a group rather than alone. That has peaked until now, the 21st Century where the family cells and the grouping of individuals is becoming weaker and weaker, because in this 21st Century humans now need less of each other to survive. Thus, now society as a whole is becoming more egocentric, and of course individuals. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 2:50pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:That further begs the question.....how do you define ethics? I do not want to push you to the wall. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by budaatum: 2:54pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
vaxx:What question? Ethics are the moral principles that govern a person's behaviour or the conducting of an activity. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by vaxx: 2:57pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
budaatum:what are this moral principle? You will begin to see the loopholes yourself. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 5:40pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
LordReed:What is "Not really"? "Not really" about what? Everyone except you knows, parables are moral or spiritual lessons. What is and where is the lesson in your wannabe parable? LordReed:Explains a lot about what views of mine? List a couple of them You mean quite different from the blindspot view of what the world and you think religion really is? I am a religious person, but not in same way/manner, what you deem being religious is LordReed:"What is objective morality? The idea that morality is inherent in the universe, that in any situation it will either be always true or always false." - LordReed © Now you see why I pushed your "objective morality" back at you and said I am not buying it. That incest has dropped a fly in your definition of objective morality oil ointment As much as you wouldnt like to admit to, the human race sure kicked off with the offspring-offspring type You declared that you'll call incest immoral, simply because there is no need for it and it may cause harm How about, incest that acccording to your words, may have been necessary at some point in the early human history? How would you categorise that incest? Moral or immoral? LordReed:I dont need you to tell me it was a joke Of course, it was a joke. It was a joke of a rhetorical question, I played along with. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 5:58pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: That's an assignment for you to figure out.
Unnecessary to list them out so I won't.
What the heck are you on about? Is not clear that I think morality is relative? That incest at some point in human history was necessary and so moral? Damn, you just like dribbling your own shadow.
It's OK to admit you were a bit flustered and thought I was questioning your intelligence. |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by MuttleyLaff: 6:54pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
LordReed:Cat got your tongue LordReed:What you afraid of revealing? I'll be judge of whether it's unnecessary to list or not to list. Budaatum doesnt know I can judge, that I am a god. LordReed:"What is objective morality? The idea that morality is inherent in the universe, that in any situation it will either be always true or always false." - LordReed © You cant have your cake and eat it Incest according to your objective morality explanation, that you voluntarily gave and/or gave without being duress, cant be immoral and moral Your explanation says, it has to be always true or always false. Not switching from being moral to immoral Going along with your objective morality explanation, if incest was moral to begin with, then it has to be always moral, and be moral till and/or after kingdom come. LordReed:I wasnt a tad flustered nor did I at any moment think you are questioning my intelligence I actually was, as a matter of fact, amused, and so decided to borrow & unleash on you Einstein's "If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself" remark |
Re: The Scientist And His Dogs: A Modern Parable by LordReed(m): 7:07pm On Sep 06, 2018 |
MuttleyLaff: Oya come and force me to list it. LoLz. I declare it unnecessary, go and bring police. LMAO.
It seems English is hard for you today. Dude I DO NOT BELIEVE IN OBJECTIVE MORALITY. Is that clear enough for you? You need Igbo or Yoruba translation? |
Pastor Adeboye - Man With Animals Inside His Head. / Heaviest Economic Crises Comming Soon - Tb Joshua / Logicboy Was A Christian For 22 Years
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 103 |