If we could harness the full power of genetic alteration, such as in the Leviathan Trilogy, would you think it morally right to use created beasts as weapons? Imagine, instead of soldiers, you could send a huge, fearsome fighting bear tearing into an enemy's fortification, or rule the sky with enlarged birds.
The real question is; Would you oil your war machines Or would you feed them?
Well I would say it depends. Do these created beasts have emotions, can they connect to people. Is it possible for them to? Also, will they be attacking humans? If the answer to any of the above is true, than in most circumstances yes, I would find it morally wrong.
If we could harness the full power of genetic alteration, such as in the Leviathan Trilogy, would you think it morally right to use created beasts as weapons?
If we've evolved as a society so far as to reach the point where we can create these beasts we **** well better not have a use for them.
Answer to your questions; The beasts wouldn't have feelings unless you wanted them to, and they would be killing humans, some directly (kraken, bears) some more indirectly.
Well no we shouldn't. We've come so far into technology and we use it to destroy each other. Just looking on it, the question should be asked, was this really the best way to use this amazing scientific achievement? Was this the best I could come up with?
Personally I don't see why not apart from moral reasons. We have already used attack dogs, the Soviets used Suicide Dog bombers, and I think the Germans tried bat bombs already.
And honestly, if it wins a war, do you think the generals really care about morals?
lol nicho. And to answer the OP: No, I don't think that it would be morally right to use them, although the generals probably don't care, as long as it wins the war...
i dont think that should be done. we humans just LOOOOVE to fight and kill eachother and we already hurt other creatures on earth. no need in controlling their minds, send them to war and hurt them even more.
also, i dont think there are many animals that can use ranged attacks (and you can pretty much defend yourself from those that do). machinary pretty much wins over animals when it comes to defence and ranged fighting
i dont think that should be done. we humans just LOOOOVE to fight and kill eachother and we already hurt other creatures on earth. no need in controlling their minds, send them to war and hurt them even more.
Not all humans love to kill each other with gore and violence. Heartless people or greedy ones love to kill each other.
The real question is; Would you oil your war machines Or would you feed them?
Examples of possible long-range creatures of war; Flechette Bat: Bats that can be lured to a target by a white spotlight and circle above, but when the light turns red they start coughing up small, sharp pieces of metal (their food) tearing apart and man who isn't under sufficient cover Kraken (sort of): A sea beast to accompany ships. The only viable weapons against these beasts would be "Kraken-fighting arms) in other words, mechanical arms with big pincers at the ends to lop of tentaclesÂ
I doubt we'd take a step back and resort to animals instead of machines. Back in the days before complex machines, animals like elephants were used to create fear. They're not needed anymore because soulless metal that feels no pain or fear seems more frightening than any creature.
they start coughing up small, sharp pieces of metal (their food) tearing apart and man who isn't under sufficient cover
Yes, if you can get to the tubes before your head's torn off by a tentacle, not to mention you won't know there's a kraken attacking you until there's a couple holes in your ship and the crew are getting whipped off the deck. And the best part: the Kraken has no soldiers to do with it. You don't sacrifice anything, yet your enemy loses it all (on the ship)