Get e-book The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction book. Happy reading The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction Pocket Guide.

Site Information Navigation

Franco Palazzi - - Philosophia 42 4 Kevin Nelson - - Synthese 1 John Leslie - - Philosophy 85 4 Geoffrey Gorham - - Philosophy in Review 18 2 Peacock - - Dialogue 38 3 Reducing the Risk of Human Extinction. Jason G. Matheny - unknown. Kenneth W.

Human Extinction by 2026? A Last Ditch Strategy to Fight for Human Survival

Spence - - Journal of Experimental Psychology 71 5 Sylvie Allouche - unknown. Solidarity Facing World Problems. Katrina Wyman - unknown. Probability Theory and the Doomsday Argument. William Eckhardt - - Mind Added to PP index Total views 80 98, of 2,, Recent downloads 6 months 18 44, of 2,, How can I increase my downloads?

If we could sequence the genomes of rhinos that lived in large and genetically diverse populations—rhinos whose bones and skin might be preserved in museum collections, for example—we could identify genetic diversity that has been lost in rhino populations because of the recent declines. Then, we could use genome-editing technologies to re-engineer that lost diversity into living rhino populations. As human populations grow, it is more and more of a challenge to find places on our planet that have not been somehow influenced by human activity.

If we are going to maintain a rich and biodiverse world, which I believe benefits us as much as the other species who live here, we are going to need to become more active in our approach to conservation. It will not be sufficient to set aside parks or wild spaces. De-extinction may not be the answer to the biodiversity crisis that we are facing today, but the technologies that are being developed in the name of de-extinction may become powerful new tools in an active conservation regime.

Why not provide populations a little bit of genomic assistance so they can survive in a world that is changing too quickly for natural evolutionary processes to keep up? Upon hearing about de-extinction, he may say, "Why are you bothering with all of these recently extinct things? Let's bring back the ancestral bird that gave rise to of all the Galapagos finches.

I have some hypotheses to test. Continue or Give a Gift. Privacy Policy , Terms of Use Sign up.


  • Neurological Practice An Indian Perspective!
  • Subscribe to our Politics & Current Affairs newsletter.
  • An End to Pornography, Sophistry, and Panty Raids.

SmartNews History. History Archaeology. World History.

John Leslie | College of Arts

Featured: The Suspect in City Hall. Science Age of Humans. Future of Space Exploration. Human Behavior. Our Planet. Earth Optimism Summit. Ingenuity Ingenuity Festival. The Innovative Spirit.

EVOLUTION NEWS

Travel Taiwan. American South.

The Sixth Extinction

Travel With Us. At the Smithsonian Visit.

Biologist Beth Shapiro offers a guide to the science and ethics of using DNA for de-extinction

New Research. May does raise important questions about the way that human beings treat animals. There is, no doubt, much cruelty, but extermination of humanity as a solution to animal cruelty seems merely more of the same. We are after all, on some level, animals as well, and we should take with a grain of salt any philosopher who looks approvingly on human extermination as a remedy for animal extermination.

Surely there are better ways to protect animals than the elimination of the only species that contemplates morality. That such ideas are promulgated by anyone outside of a locked mental ward and given space in major media should give us pause. But May is a philosopher, and his final solution for human folly raises a logical question as well. In what way would human extinction be moral or immoral?

After all, if there were no men, who would judge moral outcomes? Surely not animals, who lack the capacity for abstraction inherent to moral reasoning, and surely not inanimate objects, which lack any sort of mental capacity. The oceans might be cleaner without man, but they would neither know nor care nor judge.