to recapitulate:
Momaw Nadon: First, I must say that humans or sentient robots will never be God.
inquest: Which is why they shouldn't try to play the part.
Momaw Nadon: Is it wrong to want to rid the world of disease and hunger? Is it wrong to want to put an end to human suffering? Is it wrong to want to live forever (or as long as we want to?
inquest: There's nothing wrong with wanting any of these things. Playing God in order to achieve them, on the other hand, is another matter.
King Prout: ah. so you ARE against medicine, high-efficiency food production, labor-saving technology, and any means of extending life. On religious grounds. In other words: A Luddite. very good: nice to know where an opponent stands.
inquest: Ah, so you CAN'T read. Good: nice to know when I don't even have to waste time with an opponent.
so:
inquest: There's nothing wrong with wanting any of these things. Playing God in order to achieve them, on the other hand, is another matter.
-becomes-
inquest: There's nothing wrong with wanting to rid the world of disease and hunger, to put an end to human suffering, or to live forever (or as long as we want to). Playing God in order to achieve ridding the world of disease and hunger, putting an end to human suffering, or living forever (or as long as we want to), on the other hand, is another matter.
-becomes-
inquest: There's nothing wrong with wanting to rid the world of disease and hunger, to put an end to human suffering, or to live forever (or as long as we want to). Playing God in order to achieve ridding the world of disease and hunger, putting an end to human suffering, or living forever (or as long as we want to), on the other hand, is NOT "nothing wrong".
-becomes-
inquest: There's nothing wrong with wanting to rid the world of disease and hunger, to put an end to human suffering, or to live forever (or as long as we want to). Playing God in order to achieve ridding the world of disease and hunger, putting an end to human suffering, or living forever (or as long as we want to), on the other hand, is wrong.
So...
As you have not yet defined what you consider "playing God", and are posting your opposition on a thread concerning technological modification of natural systems and limitations, the operational assumption a reader must make is that you consider doing ANYTHING which contravenes God's will (as expressed Biblically or in the natural order) in pursuit of the abovementioned objectives is wrong.
As this category of human endeavor includes medicine (particularly: gene-therapy, gene surgery, cybernetic prostheses, pharmacology, antibiotics, innoculation and vaccination, and corrective surgery, among others), cultivation and animal husbandry (particularly: genetic engineering of plants and animals, more conventional breeding programs, land-clearing, and strain-controlled cropping, among others), any and all environment control and labor-saving devices (covering technology all the way from powered closed environments through metallurgy and ceramics and other manufactured-materials technologies all the way down to the humble wedge, lever, and hammerstone), and -now- all artificial means of life-extension (from so-called "medical immortality" to such mundane things as CPR), the only conclusion which can be drawn from what you have posted is that you are a raving Luddite.
Now, had you instead said something along the lines of the following:
"Given the fact of human inability to comprehend more than the slightest and most proximal and obvious parts of the webs of causation and effect, for every human decision there shall always be more unintended consequences than intended or foreseen consequences. It would thus be unwise to widely implement, willy-nilly, technological innovations which fundamentally alter the basic factors of human life without pausing for serious consideration of the balance of net worth versus possible risks and overall importance of benefits versus losses."
I would not have taken you to task. I agree with such a sentiment.
However... you did NOT make such a statement. You instead harped on superstitious dread.
Actually, I did. If you're going to jump into an exchange making wild comments, it might help to at least follow it back a few posts first.