OnlineBookClub.org

Every good has its bad not excluding scientific innovation.It's pointless to expect that such change will not affect the world.It's simply a price that has to be paid for development to occur.

I think science has never been the culprit, only how the people use it. Science itself has never done anything negative. It has only helped humanity (again, depending on who is using it) so i think technological advances shouldn't just be accepted but pushed and praised.

I think there should be some guidelines when it comes to innovation, but I also believe that the more we can discover, the more we can help people. I know there's a lot of talk about automated everything, but why worry about that now? We should do what we can in the present.

In my point of view, everything that has become dangerous or hazardous in the history are most of the times due to human wrong doing. Only a handful of things have been inherently hazardous. Even there were guidelines, the parties who are taking upper hand can violate them as they wish. So innovations should not stop, it is the human thinking that should be changed

Thus is why I choose to hold fast to my unwavering trust and faith in God.

I think that having rules and regulations on innovation is really an oxymoron. The best innovations do not have excessive regulations. In order to be truly innovative, one needs to be free in their creativity. Case in point is the internet. Had there been a lot of rules and regulations in its infancy, it would not have morphed into the wonderful medium we enjoy today.

brunettebiblio wrote: ↑02 Mar 2018, 09:32 This is a question that's been (and will be) posed for a very long time. Certain technologies can alter human life completely, but at what cost and to what reward? When do things go from natural to unnatural? I think it really depends on the technology. I'd love to be able to choose the hair and eye color of my future child for example, but I would never want to be involuntarily resurrected as a cyborg. It really comes down to who has the final say in whatever that technology is, I think, and how much will it alter their life for both the positive and the negative, to answer whether or not a technology is ethical.

I feel as if this is the only thing that would make sense in the world of innovations. I think who has the final say in how the tech will be used will determine how it helps or harms the world.

omg lol the title of this topic is soooooooooo funny - is scientific innovation going to ruin the world - of course it’s not - is the creator from the 14th century

There must be check and balances inherent in the system to be developed. Only then can we use technology to our full advantage. There's definitely enough literature on this topic so I'm sure it's merely a matter of planning.

We should always allow for innovations, but there should be guidelines. Otherwise, scientists may lose track of what is ethical and what is not. For example, if there were ever a way to bring the dead back to life, it could raise the question of whether any human should have that kind of power.

Technology and scientific innovation are amazing things that generally uplift our society. Unfortunately we tend towards a rather capitalist society which means that the consequences of our actions are rarely weighed up against the present benefit.

I imagine more thoughtful legislation and enforcement would be the best way to prevent scientific innovation from ruining the world.

The ability to advance forward in science and technology are part of what makes us human, in our own way we all have a desire to improve and strive for a better world. Not having any guidelines or restrictions allows some of the best minds to develop and invent potentially world altering technology and without this freedom, the technology might never have come into being.
However, that being said, innovation was also at the heart of scientific developments such as cloning which, due to the dangers surrounding it has been strictly controlled. Just because something can be invented doesn't mean that it should be.
Sadly, until the technology is invented, we cannot even begin to imagine the consequences it could have. Therefore I believe that the only way to control these risks is to permit scientific innovation, but carefully review the finished product before allowing it to be released into the wider population.

We go very, very carefully. We need the ability to turn our backs on inventions whose potential use may be manipulated to justify the means. Supplying cloned organs also means the construction of a limitless army. There should be directives and rules defining the safe use of potentially dangerous technology. We are a young species, and we have to remember to take responsibility on this force called technology. Again -- we have to be very, very careful.

I think it all goes down to the choices we make. We can only hope that people will choose the right and ethical way in using technology. The problem is that very few people care about the effect of their actions on the rest of the society.

It's not black and white and it's different in every field. There are pros and cons to everything.