Redefining 'Life', the physical and moral
#1
Posted 05 October 2008 - 07:08 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8100301974.html
Doctors here are pushing for it and challenging what can be counted as 'living' even after someone technically has passed away. What do you guys think?
#2
Posted 05 October 2008 - 10:05 PM
Death occurs when the body has completely ceased to function. As in no heartbeat, no digestive functions, etc.
#3
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:02 AM
http://nl.youtube.co...h?v=JJnFOTkV214
But yeah, something like what toasty said, I'll redifine when I get back from school.
#4
Posted 06 October 2008 - 09:53 AM
#5
Posted 06 October 2008 - 08:13 PM
Caael, on Oct 6 2008, 10:53 AM, said:
That would definitely be pretty sweet.
Anyway.......I don't really know what to think of that article.
#6
Posted 06 October 2008 - 11:34 PM
Caael, on Oct 7 2008, 02:53 AM, said:
Sure, if it weren't for the assloads of ethical questions that would raise.
#7
Posted 06 October 2008 - 11:37 PM
But it's impossible without creating an artificial brain, so no need to worry about it.
#8
Posted 06 October 2008 - 11:59 PM
Caael, on Oct 6 2008, 08:53 AM, said:
I doubt it would work at all anyway. The nerves in the body wouldn't respond to your brain. I'm probably wrong, this is just off the top of my head.
#11
Posted 07 October 2008 - 12:37 AM
you need a healthy body to do it, maaan
#13
Posted 07 October 2008 - 12:45 AM
#14
Posted 07 October 2008 - 12:55 AM
Miley Cyrus, on Oct 6 2008, 10:59 PM, said:
There would be problems with the body accepting the brain, just like it would if it was accepting any other organ. Any slight chance that it doesn't accept the brain, and you're suddenly brain dead.
Plus, it would take too much time to connect all the nerves and tissue. By the time the procedure was finished, the brain would be dead anyway.