On March 5, 2007 Dr.James Hughes spoke in defense of human enhancement at a talk in the 10am chapel of the East Texas Baptist University in Marshall Texas. Critiquing human enhancement was Dr. Brent Waters.
Good for James Hughes for submitting himself to the Darwinian fray - that's no easy task. Yet what can be proved in such a debate?
It's basically a Darwinian game of charisma - as oppossed to point by point analysis of specific information (which is best done online - not in front of a crowd).
Isn't it wise to have one's resources at hand instead of speaking from memory?
---------------
Who determines what is said is true? Who wins?
It's a game of playing to attributional errors.
I agree, maybe that's why he should have a laptop in front of him.