Ask Lemmy

Lobotomize all conservatives to see if their IQ increases.

We've exhausted all other options.

Here's a very unethical linguistics experiment that I think would be interesting:

Raising a group of children completely isolated from any language, spoken or otherwise. They would not be fully isolated from people, but those people would not be able to communicate with each other in the vicinity of the children (no speaking, no gestures, etc.) Of course, to isolate them from language would mean strictly controlling their lives (very unethical). Could they communicate with each other, and maybe even develop a language?

Who from the US government will last the longest in a bonfire. Although it might be questionable if this experiment is really unethical.

Raise a group of a dozen newborns with absolutely zero contact outside of their own group. Food and necessities get provided of course, but no language learning, no nurturing, no generational teaching.

What kind of community do they form when they are old enough to grasp such things? Do they develop their own language; or a different method of communication entirely. How do they stratify their society, or even do they?

At a certain point, when they are old enough, introduce challenges that only work if they cooperate with one another. See what happens.

Lock someone is a room-wide 24h fMRI or some other imaging technique to get a full recording of a human body working.

The mouse utopia experiment but on humans. Ive always seen a subset of people who bemoan having to work or develop specialized skills to contribute to society. They want everything provided for them so their whole life can be leasure and comfort. A lot of socialism and communism selling points tend to be about having social services and things provided to you.

I'm interested to see the long term affects of people in a society where EVERYTHING is provided for you all the time. Every survival concern, sexual pleasure, every base urge, every whim and desire. For decades and decades and decades. Would it be a genuine good for society or would it be a monkeys paw situation?

Ive always hypothesized that any human society that attempts this will quickly erode into something similar to the mouse utopia.

Without any environmental pressures or meaningful challenges to overcome a large portion of the population without strong internal drives will become lethally/suicidally lazy, apathetic, and narcicistic

I suspect theres a large amount of people who simply have zero internal drives to apply themselves to doing a thing unlesd they have to. without the pressure of survival in either a physical or economic way they would simply sit on their ass, jerk off, play games, and maybe groom themselves, for decades until they die. Merit and overcoming challenge are important aspects of drive and dopamine generation. You deprive a person of those things they become lethargic. If that sentiment proves itself true it will be a hard pill to swallow for a lot of ideologies.

Unethical questions:

Statistically speaking, how many people would escelate their wants to socially taboo depravities? How quickly?

How long on average would it take for pleasure to become less meaningful in the face of instant gratification? Is there a logarithmic function that charts this?

How many people on average decide to begin self harm out to seek novel sensations? How long until onset?

How many people choose to live out a full life vs taking the placebo cyanide capsule and being removed from experiment? What would their reasonings be?

Remove every unhealthy person and/or gene modify existing ones to eliminate every allergy orbodily defect caused by gene defect.

Also gene modify so that theres no mental detorioration and humans die just because they are old and the nody can't keep up with maintenance.

Separate a child from society. Like place them into a void with no human culture. And see what they think later on.

Take the people expressing their violent political fantasies in threads like this and make them live in the worlds they're advocating for.

Allow all kinds of drugs and other enhancements in sports and see where the limits of the body are

Most research on human embryonic stem cells - currently impossible in western countries due to ethics concerns.

Theoretically, if a few stem cells from every embryo early on and frozen that might be a huge boon for them once they grow up to adults with potential health issues. Need a new heart? Grow one in a lab from the preserved cells - perfectly compatible.

Currently these kinds of things can't be explored, and whilst the ethics may be dubious the potential medical benefits left on the table are astonishing.

Take ten or twenty thousand children, take over a fairly large portion of a midwestern state, build a large and complete environment for them to live in including towns, museums, theme parks etc. and raise them as normal Americans but absolutely 100% avoid introducing them to the concept of religion until they're 25.

Put a hundred toddlers on an island. Leave a few older children that will disappear a few years later that are taught to fish/hunt/gather. See what kind of language develops, or what kind of civilization. How many survive?

It is VERY unethical. Add variables to other islands, such as the amount of children, and what you teach them.

Hypothesis: Conservatives will refuse to believe contradicting facts regardless of punishment.

Experiment: Use increasingly painful stimulus for negative reinforcement when subjects espouse harmful views, ie racism.

Worldwide, making all coffee decaf, and not telling anyone.

gather massive amounts of stats on the ideal amount of physical punishment to mete out to children to produce the best results in adults.