Hobbes' Choice wrote:SpheresOfBalance wrote:Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Yes - you've gone off on one again.
Enjoy your solitude, you seem to thrive on it.
What the hell are you talking about?
Exactly what I could have asked you!!!!
Why not read back to yourself your last offering and suggest how it might related to designer babies.
OK, now I know what the problem is. OFTEN, very often, I speak from my knowledge in psychology. I speak of the why's people do as they do. To me it goes hand in hand with philosophy. Why?

Because if one doesn't understand human motivation, including their own, then often their thoughts, beliefs, reasoning, and then assertions, come off as shallow, superficial, and uneducated, as they don't know why they say the things they do, they believe they do, but that's as far as it goes, and it's quite obvious, at least to people like me. Contrary to a lot of peoples belief here, I'm a very deep person, delving much deeper in peoples words than most do.
Knowing the why's of peoples motivation starts with understanding survival of the fittest, competition, fear, peer pressure, pride, self esteem, self image, and lately, my newest book, the Pulitzer prize winning "Denial of Death," written by cultural anthropologist, PhD, Ernest Becker, etc. Don't believe his book only contains references to cultural anthropology and psychology, as he also references several philosophers as well. Trust me, it's an important read for any philosopher.
It's like this, as a philosopher trying to come to terms with wisdom, knowledge and truth, one must know oneself so as to remove their psychological bias from the equation, else they can never get as close to the absolute truth of what philosophy can offer. Is there not philosophy of mind as a study in philosophy? Of course there is. If one is using the mind to chase down philosophical query, is it not of paramount importance to understand that mind? If one does not fully understand their mind, can that mind lend correctly to the study of philosophy? The answer is no! Sure they can read another's words, but their truest 'understanding' can never be fully realized without understanding the mind of both the one that wrote, and is reading those words.
Of course you can see it any way you want to see it, but I know I'm correct about this. Which is why I study both philosophy and psychology. They support one another, making each other stronger. Their study go hand in hand.
So I was speaking of the main reason one would want to, (why), pursue such endeavor, as pioneering designer babies, despite anything they might say to the contrary, which is much deeper than most would go, not being informed by psychology. Sorry about that.
