Extract of a very interesting opinion in reaction to this article:
http://www.slate.fr/story/29867/placent ... s-commerce
Attention this notice reveals (a little) the plot:
(...)
There was recently a film: "Mr Nobody" which seems to me to have brought a clear and particularly accessible answer to people who do not necessarily have a heavy baggage of studies, to this question of happiness, and who could be discouraged by the facade technicality, as regards regenerative medicine see stem cells. This if we consider that the medical issue of stem cells must be regenerative medicine.
The film tells the story of a child, then an adult and an ordinary old man who never makes a choice, and who nevertheless keeps the memory of having made all the choices possible, even those which he objectively could not have made in the past. He finally understood that the course of his history was to have reached an era of humanity when time was going to be reversed for reasons of physics rather than medicine; which in fact allows his existence to make a Yo yo, he lives his life in both directions from embryo to old man then in the other direction. or does not see the unfolding backwards of his "second existence" but we understand better how he can have accumulated all his strange memories. The film underlines throughout a joie de vivre which is the realization of happiness and particularly at its beginning but also at its end.
The film is a fiction, so we can make different interpretations, the best in my opinion is a perspective of memory, memories, and their true importance (too many Hollywood films catalog human memory as an ability to forget and thus melts a suicidal eulogy of sad passions). But for the occasion I will use two other interpretations.
The first of her, simple, would be to say that this film defends the idea that happiness would never die and to accumulate an infinity of joyful memory as sad. By considering this vision of the film, research on stem cells and the development of regenerative medicine is no longer a possibility but an imperative: since our quest for happiness would depend on it. By the same impetus, we would consciously give an atavistic objective to medicine and ethics, we would mask as well as atavism feeds more sad passions than logic in due form.
In fact, I believe that the film shows something very different, and it is the genius in the true sense of the scenario of this film (without even having to consider the other qualities of the film that are not leftover elsewhere, and this despite some lengths).
If we think about it, it is not the fact of remaining in a precise situation which constitutes the happiness of Mr Nobody, but rather its unfolding, in other words it is that his life has a meaning, whether it is that of an aging or rejuvenation: the condition of happiness is that life has a meaning (in the proper sense, as a sense of direction on a road), it is necessary either to become old, or to become an embryo, what is between two does not constitute not happiness, but simply one of its stages.
Also considering the immediate prospects of regenerative medicine, that is to say that it can only hope in its infancy that freeze the aging of the individual and not properly reverse it (although it may be a more distant prospect, but highly hypothetical to the point of being fantasy).
If we think about the movie Mr Nobody, we have every reason to believe that stem cell research, even regenerative medicine, can not give man any more happiness, than if it is to authorize the continuation of the sense of it (its aging or reversal of it for fans of science fiction), and that used in another way, it could deprive it, which is one if it is the only reason for the consider it unethical.
Let us understand well, it is not to say that prolonging the life of the human being is contrary to happiness, it is quite the opposite, but that to deprive it of a global sense, it is probably the safest way to deprive the men of that happiness which they seek so much, and which they have so much difficulty in obtaining.
(...)
