/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3824307
You agree that morality is poorly defined and yet you talk about it as if it were important. "Moral issues" is meaningless if one doesn't come up with a proper definition of morality. It isn't a matter of discovering the definition of morality, it's a matter of us making one up. Anybody can through a few sounds together and call it a word, but until that word has a well defined concept attached to it there is no reason to waste a thought on it.

>>3755654
I think you need to put more confidence in the human ability to reason. We are both smart individuals. We both know how neurons basically work. We should be able to come up with some possible explanations.

If you have any qualms with my theory then do speak up.

tl;dr - Should mankind spend the time to develop nanotechnology from scratch using biology merely as an inspiration or should mankind focus on biology and tweak current microorganisms to suite our needs?

Whichever technique yields the most results in the near future will likely get all the funding, therefore starving the competitor. There can only be one!