Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Sex Will Be Obsolete In Our Future

pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 9:42:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Eh, I think makin' babies the fun way will always be in our hearts. It's kind of so hardwired into us that I don't think reproductive sex will ever become obsolete.

Although, I DID have the question as to whether this means you think that people will stop having sex? Because I KNOW that's never ever ever going to happen.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 4:02:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 9:42:33 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Eh, I think makin' babies the fun way will always be in our hearts. It's kind of so hardwired into us that I don't think reproductive sex will ever become obsolete.

Although, I DID have the question as to whether this means you think that people will stop having sex? Because I KNOW that's never ever ever going to happen.

Once we start genetically modifying babies to be more intelligence and more physical attributes than non modified babies, we will have no choice but to make babies in labs or allow our child to be "less-equipped" for the happenings that society allows.
Also, sexual stimulation comes from the brain. To assume that some person can get you to orgasm faster and better than your own brain is highly unlikely.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 4:14:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, it just made me laugh imagining that sex's only purpose is procreation...
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 4:28:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 4:14:19 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, it just made me laugh imagining that sex's only purpose is procreation...

This.
Nolite Timere
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 4:37:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 4:14:19 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, it just made me laugh imagining that sex's only purpose is procreation...

I'm saying sex will be obsolete for procreation and entertainment. I don't know why you decided to post your comment when nothing about "sex is only for procreation" was mentioned until you entered the conversation.
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 4:50:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

I grant you that the upper class of society will probably turn to IVF more and more, but those who cannot afford it will always "get 'er done" the old fashion way.
Tsar of DDO
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 5:10:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 4:50:12 PM, YYW wrote:
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

I grant you that the upper class of society will probably turn to IVF more and more, but those who cannot afford it will always "get 'er done" the old fashion way.

IVF is roughly 10-15k. That is affordable to any class as long as payment plans are accepted. That's also the approximate cost for IVF today, it will most likely get cheaper in the future.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 5:42:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

If you think "stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain" will ever replace traditional sex then you are doing it wrong. Do you really think intimacy could be improved by eliminating a partner from it?

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

If we are having sex with a brain stimulation device, then I'm not sure what "being gay" would even mean, would there be male and female brain stimulation devices or something?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 5:59:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Maybe. I mean, the reality is just as important as the feeling we get. Also, we should keep the capability of doing it the old fashioned way. As well as being built into us, it's also an insurance policy.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 6:17:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 5:42:56 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

If you think "stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain" will ever replace traditional sex then you are doing it wrong. Do you really think intimacy could be improved by eliminating a partner from it?

If you don't think your brain controls every sensation and "intimate connection" you feel, you're delusional. Intimacy and sex are 2 different things.
If I have an intimate connection with someone and this device can manipulate that intimate "feeling" while it stimulates an orgasm, that person is not needed for sexual purposes.
Your brain determines what you feel, taste, touch, smell, and hear. As long as you think you're having sex, you would be having sex, but without a partner.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

If we are having sex with a brain stimulation device, then I'm not sure what "being gay" would even mean, would there be male and female brain stimulation devices or something?

I assume the device would be able to fulfill any desire you needed to get your rocks off.
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 6:21:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 5:59:32 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Maybe. I mean, the reality is just as important as the feeling we get.

What do you mean?

Also, we should keep the capability of doing it the old fashioned way.

Of course, if we didn't that would be atrocious.

As well as being built into us, it's also an insurance policy.

How so?

Sorry, I'd rather ask than assume, though I do think I know what you mean.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 6:38:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 6:21:31 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 7/13/2013 5:59:32 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Maybe. I mean, the reality is just as important as the feeling we get.

What do you mean?

The enjoyment isn't just through physical and mental pleasure, but the fact that you are having sex.


Also, we should keep the capability of doing it the old fashioned way.

Of course, if we didn't that would be atrocious.

I'm sure many people would suggest we wouldn't need the capability anymore, but I'm optimistic that we'd dismiss this.


As well as being built into us, it's also an insurance policy.

How so?

If our baby making machines end up making people with many illnesses, stop working or get sabotaged, what do we do? Go extinct?


Sorry, I'd rather ask than assume, though I do think I know what you mean.

Yeah.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 6:59:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 6:38:40 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 7/13/2013 6:21:31 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 7/13/2013 5:59:32 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Maybe. I mean, the reality is just as important as the feeling we get.

What do you mean?

The enjoyment isn't just through physical and mental pleasure, but the fact that you are having sex.

Maybe, but we consider reality to be what we perceive, so if we perceived the sex we had was real, nobody would be able to convince our mind it wasn't real.


Also, we should keep the capability of doing it the old fashioned way.

Of course, if we didn't that would be atrocious.

I'm sure many people would suggest we wouldn't need the capability anymore, but I'm optimistic that we'd dismiss this.

Other than for insurance as you suggested below, it wouldn't be a necessity, but rather a back-up plan.


As well as being built into us, it's also an insurance policy.

How so?

If our baby making machines end up making people with many illnesses, stop working or get sabotaged, what do we do? Go extinct?

I'm glad I asked. You brought up another good point that I agree with.
I thought you were saying sex is an insurance policy because it can be used to influence peoples behaviors at times. Like a wife withholding sex in order to get her husband to wash the dishes.


Sorry, I'd rather ask than assume, though I do think I know what you mean.

Yeah.
Drayson
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 7:55:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Depends if technology can simulate all the sensations of genuine sex.

I must admit, I've always been concerned about what might happen if Holodecks (a la Star Trek) actually became a reality. Being able to have any sexual experience you want, without having to work on getting to know someone, could spell doom for the human race :P
"I'm not saying I don't trust you...and I'm not saying I do. But I don't"

-Topper Harley
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2013 8:13:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 6:17:08 PM, pozessed wrote:
At 7/13/2013 5:42:56 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

If you think "stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain" will ever replace traditional sex then you are doing it wrong. Do you really think intimacy could be improved by eliminating a partner from it?

If you don't think your brain controls every sensation and "intimate connection" you feel, you're delusional.

If you think a brain simulation is better than a real experience in the real world, you"re delusional.

Intimacy and sex are 2 different things.

Like I already said, then you"re doing it wrong.

If I have an intimate connection with someone and this device can manipulate that intimate "feeling" while it stimulates an orgasm, that person is not needed for sexual purposes.

Maybe you are comparing this to self-stimulation where the other person isn"t necessary anyway, but very few people are superficial enough to prefer a simulated brain experience to the mutual sharing of intimacy between two people who love one another.

Your brain determines what you feel, taste, touch, smell, and hear. As long as you think you're having sex, you would be having sex, but without a partner.

Yep, just as I thought, you"re fantasizing about a better way to self-stimulate, but trust me, a real relationship with a real person will be better. You"ve watched the matrix too many times, there"s a lot to be said for living in the real world and relating to real people.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

If we are having sex with a brain stimulation device, then I'm not sure what "being gay" would even mean, would there be male and female brain stimulation devices or something?

I assume the device would be able to fulfill any desire you needed to get your rocks off.

No thanks, I just don"t want a device to get my rocks off, I"m sorry, but I prefer the physical expression of a real and genuine relationship with the woman I love to any self-stimulation fantasy you can contrive.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Quan
Posts: 97
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 2:14:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 8:13:13 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
If you think a brain simulation is better than a real experience in the real world, you"re delusional.
If the technology were sufficiently advanced, you would theoretically be unable to distinguish between the real and virtual worlds. I wouldn't be holding my breath for such technology, though.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2013 2:59:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/16/2013 2:14:03 PM, Quan wrote:
At 7/13/2013 8:13:13 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
If you think a brain simulation is better than a real experience in the real world, you're delusional.
If the technology were sufficiently advanced, you would theoretically be unable to distinguish between the real and virtual worlds. I wouldn't be holding my breath for such technology, though.

Even if such technology were available, how is indistinguishable better?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2013 2:08:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

(1) Sex will not become obsolete so long as it is still pleasurable. We may be able to replicate that pleasure with some kind of electronic in the future, but that wouldn't make sex obsolete anymore than masturbation or sex toys do.

(2) There are no good arguments against homosexual behavior now, yet people still try. No matter what, there will always be people arguing against whatever they don't like.
Jack212
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2013 2:42:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/13/2013 9:13:26 AM, pozessed wrote:
In our future we will be able to make babies in laboratories and have orgasmic stimulation from electronic devices that send signals to our brain.

Once these abilities are introduced to society, people should have no argument that being gay is wrong IMO. Especially after a few generations have welcomed and accepted these attributes, they might even be considered "natural" measures to later generations.

Thoughts?

It's more efficient to rub your genitals together until you bust. Besides, half of sex is being intimate and naked with somebody. Women still want to carry babies in their wombs for 9 months. I can't see anybody passing those up for electrical toys and test tubes.