17
What are the implications of continued research into cloning? BY GP ESSAYS FEBRUARY 13, 2010 EMAIL THIS POST PRINT THIS POST POST A COMMENT FILED UNDER CLONING, IMPLICATION OF CLONING Recently, cloning has stepped into the limelight. Although cloning of plants from adult plant cells has been practised for many years now, it never received the attention that cloning does now. What, then, has warranted this fresh interest in cloning? It is the crossing of what was once thought to be an impassable barrier — the possibility of animal cloning. With the announcement of the success in the cloning of a sheep, the immediate implications were that of human cloning. Although many scientists have pointed out that the actual substantial benefits of animal cloning lie mostly in the agricultural realm, this has been largely ignored by the media and the general public. The impending possibility of human cloning has cast a shadow over the solutions that cloning can offer to problems such as Third World famines and the conservation of biodiversity that were once considered as pressing. Why is this so? It is simply because human cloning has overwhelming implications. Its mere possibility raises fundamental questions such as “What makes one human?” and “What is the right to be free?” that have been hotly debated by philosophers since the dawn of time. What is more important is that members of the public who would rather ignore these questions now find a need to answer them. Continued research into cloning has the most implications in research into human cloning. Even before human cloning is possible, a question arises in the process of starting research in that area, that of experiments on humans.

GP Science and Technology Essays

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: GP Science and Technology Essays

What are the implications of continued research into cloning?BY GP ESSAYS ⋅ FEBRUARY 13, 2010 ⋅  EMAIL THIS POST ⋅  PRINT THIS POST ⋅ POST A COMMENTFILED UNDER  CLONING, IMPLICATION OF CLONING

Recently, cloning has stepped into the limelight. Although cloning of plants from adult plant cells has been practised for many years now, it never received the attention that cloning does now. What, then, has warranted this fresh interest in cloning? It is the crossing of what was once thought to be an impassable barrier — the possibility of animal cloning. With the announcement of the success in the cloning of a sheep, the immediate implications were that of human cloning.

Although many scientists have pointed out that the actual substantial benefits of animal cloning lie mostly in the agricultural realm, this has been largely ignored by the media and the general public. The impending possibility of human cloning has cast a shadow over the solutions that cloning can offer to problems such as Third World famines and the conservation of biodiversity that were once considered as pressing. Why is this so?

It is simply because human cloning has overwhelming implications. Its mere possibility raises fundamental questions such as “What makes one human?” and “What is the right to be free?” that have been hotly debated by philosophers since the dawn of time. What is more important is that members of the public who would rather ignore these questions now find a need to answer them.

Continued research into cloning has the most implications in research into human cloning. Even before human cloning is possible, a question arises in the process of starting research in that area, that of experiments on humans. Society’s belief that human life is sacrosanct and that no one has a right to toy with another’s life is evidenced by public horror at tales of medical experiments on unknowing humans such as the recently revealed case of leaving syphilis untreated in black males in America.

Research into cloning will inevitably meet with failures and setbacks, very likely involving the loss of human life in the form of cells and embryos. Once again we are faced with a question already hotly debated in the issue of abortion – at what point does a foetus become human? The loss of life through this research is a major

Page 2: GP Science and Technology Essays

implication that is posed to halt any research in this direction. But then, the possible benefits of such research forces us to consider what the value is of a human life. Should we continue with such research if it were to save lives in the future?

Before we can even contemplate this question fairly we need to see what actual human cloning might result in. Obviously, we would be able to obtain genetically identical individuals. This opens up a whole new world of possibilities. For once, the debate over how environment affects human behaviour can be resolved. The use of twins in studies of how different environments affect thought and behaviour is not novel, but with human cloning, such studies could be carried out over a larger scale.

Perhaps we would finally know if the recalcitrant teenager should shout to his parents, “I’m like that because you brought me up that way!” or whether he should say “I’m like that because of your genes!” While either way the parents are in the wrong, the similar answers have a fundamental difference. From such experiments we would discover how and whether genes define intelligence, skills and even artistic and literary talent. As a result, we would be able to see if one’s success in life is simply the luck of the draw or if there is any truth behind the adage “Practice makes perfect.”But although the tantalising prospect of obtaining such truths is there, actual human cloning brings with it more problems and implications that we must consider. Countries all over the world have fought for freedom. Would a cloned human being be free? Decisions would have to be made as to whether the cloning laboratory owns him or bears responsibility towards him as a parent does to his child. Socially, who would take care of these people if the scientific community refuses to? The parent to “child” ratio would be alarmingly disproportionate, posing all manner of social problems.

In a worst-case scenario, people would own cloned beings who have no rights, a return to the despotic slavery of yesteryears. At present, unscrupulous businessmen care little enough about child labour and working conditions of labourers. Are we ready to take on new issues such as human cloning without having morality and principles lose out to commercial interests? I do not think so.

Another important implication and possibly the most frightening while also welcomed, is that cloning may reveal what makes us human. Do we truly have an immaterial “self” that we so often say

Page 3: GP Science and Technology Essays

is in the mind? Cloning can offer the answer to these questions simply by altering the cloning process and observing when a human is created without self-identity. While this is a question that awakens an insatiable curiosity, the prospect itself is chilling in the extreme.

Toying with other humans is already an issue in itself. To tinker with a person is to see how and when his self-identity is created is tantamount to lobotomy, but on a much larger scale. Even more depressing is the very prospect of actually knowing the answer to the question “What makes us human and different from other species?” Many people live in a state where they have never considered such a question. Such a great leap in self-awareness and perception is fearful to contemplate and perhaps only for the brave.

Continued research into cloning has many positive benefits in agricultural areas and conservation as well as biotechnology, but the greater interest and implications are in the area of human cloning. Here we meet with interesting and quizzical questions such as “If every cell of mine can be a person, is any injury akin to murder?” and how names affect a person’s life, “What if I wasn’t named after my great-grandfather?”

However, the importance of such conundrums and inane questions wane in comparison to the moral and ethical questions that human cloning raises about what makes us human and how much we actually value human life. Continued research into cloning not only raises such questions about what we believe but it has also heightened our sense of self-awareness. All of a sudden, in considering the implications of continued research into cloning and in trying to decide if it should be done, we realise that as a society as well as individually, we are unsure of what we believe. The prospect of cloning has forced us to realise that we are uncertain of ourselves.

Perhaps that is the most important implication of continued research into cloning — that we now have a greater self-awareness and perception of what we think.

Page 4: GP Science and Technology Essays

Should scientific research be restricted in any way?BY GP ESSAYS ⋅ JANUARY 16, 2010 ⋅  EMAIL THIS POST ⋅  PRINT THIS POST ⋅ POST A COMMENTFILED UNDER  SCIENCE

Science is the study and knowledge of the physical world and its behaviour that is based on proven facts. It has existed since a long time ago, in every part of the world. Not only has it increased our standard of living tremendously, it has also continuously improved the efficiency and quality of work done. Scientific research has come up with innovative ways that have helped us solve many problems; such as poverty, through improvements in economy, and found cures to diseases through the invention of medicines. However, some would claim that scientific research should be restricted due to the harm that science brings about. Inventions due to scientific research such as cars have brought about detrimental effects such as air pollutions, deleterious weapons invented from science research such as bombs have caused destruction and research on human life have disrupted the normal way of life. Should scientific research be restricted in any way? I would say that it should not be restricted as it have benefited us greatly and although it has also brought about unwanted problems, new solutions have been found to solve them.

Page 5: GP Science and Technology Essays

Firstly, scientific research is the solution to palliate poverty. Science is the golden path to alleviating poverty and brings success to many of the developing countries in our world today. Through scientific research, new and more effective ways of doing things are being uncovered. For an economy, new and improved ways minimize the cost of production, maximize the output with improved technology and thus, increasing revenue. The economy of a country is brought to a greater height and more profits can be earned. For example, in the 1960s, Singapore faced an economy downfall due to great competition from stronger powers. Many people lost their jobs and were trapped in poverty. Due to scientific research, new technology in 1970s brought about more effective ways of producing goods. The economy thus improved and Singapore became a more developed country. Some may disagree that scientific research can mitigate poverty as other factors such as corrupted and venal government can use the money for personal gains. Money would not be properly channeled to the poor and poverty will still be present. However, I still stand firm to my stand, that through close monitoring, I believe this is achievable and poverty can be alleviated in the long run.

Secondly, scientific research can be used to solve problems like lack of necessities such as water. Through scientific research, such necessities can be created through the inventions of innovative ideas to produce them. For countries such as Singapore that does not have its own water supply, dearth of water is a very drastic as water is an important source for human survival. However, through scientific research, such problem can be solved. In the past, we used to purchase water from Malaysia for Singapore was not equipped with the modern technology to have its own supply of water. However, today due to scientific advancement, Singapore is able to create its own water supply – the NEWater and in any case where Malaysia refuses to sell water to us, we still have our own supply of water. Although some economists might say that such scientific research is too costly and the money used on such research can be used for other beneficial areas such as improving healthcare or education, I stand strong to my point as such necessity is imperative for survival. In addition, we should ensure that such necessity would always be present.

Thirdly, cures for disease can be found through scientific research to protect humanity. New afflictions arise in our everyday life. Only through scientific research, remedy and treatment for such new

Page 6: GP Science and Technology Essays

diseases can be found to save lives. If no cure were to be found, such disease can cause death or can be passed down to the next generation and will never be eradicated. For example, during the Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) period, SARS affected many people and thousands of innocent lives were taken. If no cure was found, people would still be suffering in pain with this disease which leads to death. People might claim that although, such cures can be found, many people, especially the poor would not be able to afford them as scientific research is too costly. However, saving lives is more important and in the long run, subsidies from the government can be provided for people and all would then be able to receive such cures.

On the other hand, some people claim that scientific research is harmful to humanity.

Firstly, the improvement of our life in terms of efficiency of work done have brought about negative side effects to humans as well. Through scientific research, inventions such as cars have improved our ease of transport eminently. The time taken for us to travel is reduced tremendously and our standard of living has increased exceedingly. But some feels that the ruinous side effects such as global warming, air pollution and acid rain due to harmful gases like carbon dioxide emitted from cars have affected our health also. However, I strongly feel that science has also provided solution to such damaging effects. Through scientific research, environmentally friendly cars such as solar-powered cars and lead-free petrol have been invented to ensure such harmful environment effects do not affect the health of people. Thus, scientific research should not be restricted as it can and have constantly improving our lives.

Secondly, science can cause destruction to mankind. Due to scientific research, some people feel that more destructive and harmful weapons are invented and in this way, human lives are threatened. In the past wars involved the usage of only simple weapons such as rifles. Presently, the extent of wars has escalated as massive destruction weapons such as bombs and nuclear weapons are readily used. For example, during World War II, the bombs ‘Little boy’ and ‘Fat man’, the first nuclear weapons were invented and dropped in Hiroshima, Japan. 70,000 to 130,000 people were killed instantly. Thus, some feel that scientific research should be restricted as it is harmful to human lives. However, scientific research should not be restricted as such

Page 7: GP Science and Technology Essays

invention of weapons is a form of protection of a country from any deterrence to potential attackers.

Thirdly, some people would feel that scientific research affects the normal way of life. Scientific research on human lives through experiments such as cloning is deemed as immoral and unethical. They believe that God had created each human being unique and there is no such need for experiments such as cloning to be conducted as it would seems to be defying God. However, scientific research on human would allow us to understand more about ourselves and facts that have yet to be discovered to as to increase our knowledge on ourselves and educate the next generation about human beings.

The benefits brought by scientific have improved the standard of living of people tremendously. The foremost problems in society such as poverty, lack of necessities, diseases that could not be solved in the past can now be alleviated using the new ways found by scientific research. Although negative side effects are present due to scientific progress and human lives are being threatened, scientific research has also came up with solutions for such harmful effects. Thus, scientific research should not be restricted so as to allow mankind to continue to benefit from it.

“Recent scientific and technological innovations have enhanced the quality of life.” Do you agree?BY GP ESSAYS ⋅ MARCH 28, 2010 ⋅  EMAIL THIS POST ⋅  PRINT THIS POST ⋅ POST A COMMENTFILED UNDER  SCIENCE, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Page 8: GP Science and Technology Essays

The quality of life is normally taken to mean the general well being of people and the environment in which they live in. it is undeniable that recent scientific and technological innovations have enhanced the quality of life for many. However, the developments of today that promise us a better quality of life are also the ones that can worsen the quality of life. Science and technology give their creators and inventors ever-greater supremacy and control, for good or otherwise, over the physical universe. Indeed, the possible dire consequences and impact of misused and misapplied innovations can affect the quality of life drastically.

Technological innovations have resulted in an improved and well-established system of telecommunications and satellites. This leads to ease in access of communication system globally. International calls can now be made so readily that two people at separate ends of the world can now stay instantly in contact with a touch of the dial. But, with the onslaught of the worldwide web and wireless communication devices, technology has in fact, drawn people away from each other. The presence of electronic email and short-text messages, gave busy people of this high-tech society yet another excuse to dismiss the need for face-to-face meetings and interactions. Humans have become overly dependent upon such gadgets and devices to carry out the basic task such as to communicate. What will result from the above phenomenon is that the generations to come will be lacking in inter-personal and interactive skills.

Medical scientific and technological innovations have been largely beneficial. Death rates, infant mortality rates as well as diseases of the past that used to lead to alarming numbers of deaths, have been eradicated greatly. Modern drugs and vaccines have eased much physically suffering. But, the discovery of Euthanasia and Genetic Engineering have sparked off a series of moral questioning concerning the supposed death with dignity as well as issues that include abortion as the latter opens up possibilities of misuse. It is true that abortion practices enable pregnant women who are at health risk to remove the baby in the course of pregnancy but many have taken advantage of this procedure to rid themselves of the product of irresponsible actions on their part. Also, Euthanasia, despite being said to be death in dignity, nevertheless, opposes many religious and conservative views.

Page 9: GP Science and Technology Essays

Advanced military technological innovations have provided a higher degree of security for citizens in countries. This does actually contribute to enhancing the quality of life as cyber warfare, biological warfare and nuclear warfare help to create a new form of defence mechanism to protect the people. Conversely, advance military technological innovations have also empowered modern armies a great level of destructive potential and selective aiming targets. This results in civilians and innocent people ending up as the greater victims in wars. In addition, the use of chemical and biological weapons has diffused effects that make the clear-cut drawing of battle lines more complex and difficult. Hence, instead of enhancing the quality of life, humans’ vulnerability increases and security decreases in times of war.

Another political and legal aspect in which scientific and technological innovations have helped to improve the quality of life for humans is the availability of knowledge. Indeed, the access to information enhances democracy that provides citizens with a more liberal political system. However, it should be noted that technology, though allowing easy access to the supply of knowledge, actually devalues the worth of information and knowledge. Today, knowledge can easily turn obsolete as focus is placed on the survival of the most info and techno-savvy society. Also, what is accessible from the wide pool of resources on the worldwide web does not always provide the correct and morally upright information. For instance, the wide pool of pornography corrupts one’s mind and worsens the quality of life as it presents an improper, inaccurate and unrealistic view towards sex.

Next, computers and high-tech machinery have aided in improving many economies, especially those of the developing countries. For example, South Korea went from being a developing country to becoming a newly industrialized country because they have become more capital-intensive and technologically oriented in their industries. Areas ranging from manufacturing processes to the service sector have been made easy by the use of both the computer and machinery. Nevertheless, such gadgets have become such an indispensable and essential tool in modern life that the need for labour-intensive employment has greatly declined. This puts lowly educated and lowly skilled workers out of jobs. Such an over reliance branches into almost every type of human activity and the importance of human resources will eventually be lost with

Page 10: GP Science and Technology Essays

time. How can quality of life be enhanced when the technology is deemed more valuable and useful than human resource?

Another area to ponder about is the environmental aspect of life. Pollution and deforestation have both worsened the quality of life in today’s society. Health problems have resulted from air, water, soil and hazardous waste pollution. Governments of less developed nations, in their eagerness to improve their economies by employing technology in their commerce, are willing to forsake the importance of the environment in maintaining the quality of life of their people. Poor air quality in twenty megacities in the world, with population of more than ten million results in an increase in lung, heart and brain cancer. This is the effect of traffic fumes; industrial processes, new sewage systems and even open refuse burning. Water quality is greatly diminished by the pollution caused by petrochemical complex, pesticide and factories. The issue of deforestation is also linked to the worsening of the quality of life as basic needs of recreation, culture and leisure are greatly affected. Thus, it is evident that though busy industries can be an indication of a healthy economy that can increase the monetary aspect of standard of living, actually denies humans their basic right to drink clean water and breathe clean, uncontaminated air.

In conclusion, the issues of the quality of life that are affected by scientific and technological innovations are urgent and require much reconsideration. The nuclear power that promised virtually limitless, cheap and non-polluting energy for future generations proved otherwise in the disastrous accidents such as those that took place at Three Mile Island and Chernoblyl. Furthermore, the down sides to the supposed enhancement of the quality of life as depicted by the double-edged sword qualities of science and technology like those presented in this argument have clearly shown that recent scientific and technological innovations can increase the quality of life as well as degenerate it.

Page 11: GP Science and Technology Essays

Model Science and Tech GP Essay

12) The scientist, far from being man’s friend, is today his greatest enemy. How far do you agree with this statement?For the past century, science has been viewed as a tool of enlightenment, allowing Man to gain insights into the secrets of Mother Nature, and enabling him to manipulate this cognizance for the greater good of Mankind. As such, scientists are viewed with great respect and admiration, not only for their gifted intellect, but as well as their service to Mankind. As such, I would disagree with the statement. However, it is also possible for scientists to err, and if they do so, such a view is justified. In this capitalist age, scientists are often driven by avarice and their lust for fame rather than to help people. However, scientists are often not the true wielders of the power of science. They are acting on the commands of higher authorities. The nature of the area of research can also be problematic in the first place, and this might spark controversy among people.To judge a scientist, it would be relevant to first gain knowledge on his motives for research. For many, the allure of prosperity and fame is difficult to resist. The prospect of a future life of luxury leads many scientists to contemplate acting or even acting against their values. Not too long, a Korean scientist claimed to have had unprecedented finding in the area of genetics. He managed to gain fame overnight, but under the scrutiny of the scientific community, flaws in his work were detected and indicated that he had falsified his findings. The public responded rancourously, and it brought shame to him and his country. If a scientist is willing to compromise on his integrity to satisfy his need, the effect it would

Page 12: GP Science and Technology Essays

have on Man is often adverse. In the case where a scientist develops a potentially harmful drug but manages to successfully pass it off as treatment, the consequences could be unthinkable.At a cursory glance, it would seem that scientists control their work as they are the ones carrying it out. However, more often than not, scientists are not acting based on their will. The true wielders of the scientists’ discoveries are often higher powers such as despotic governments or rapacious corporations. In North Korea, much of the country’s already meager GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is used to further the advancement of nuclear technology and to create weapons of mass destruction. Under the regime of the late Kim Il Sung, it would be virtually impossible for any scientist to defy him. To act against Kim’s will would be tantamount to committing suicide, and even worse, the massacre of their families. Hitler also managed to ride on the credibility of the scientists to justify his own pseudo science to support the carnage of millions of Jews across Europe. Pharmaceutical firms like Pfizer and Merck devote only about 5% of their total expenditure on research to battle diseases ravaging the tropics as those people would not be able to afford the treatment anyway. Therefore, it is clear scientists do not have much control over their research after all as they obtain funds from these higher powers.Though some scientists might be corrupt, there are also scientists who are altruistic, engaging in their research for the benefit of Mankind. Albert Einstein’s most famous theory of relativity, E=mc2 won him a Nobel Prize in Physics. His work would lay the foundations for future development in quantum physics to further improve the welfare of humans, to develop machines that would greatly ease their burden. However, his work also went on to inspire the Manhattan Project which lead to the discovery of the atomic bomb. The bombs “Fat Man” and “Little Boy” were used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and it caused utter decimation of the cities, with many still living with the side-effects of the radiation. Concomitantly, one might be misled into thinking that the scientists are responsible for such horrific incidents. While scientists bear some of the blame, the major reason for such mishaps is not because of the scientist himself, but other factors which led to it, in this case, the belligerence of Japan. Recently in the spotlight, there has been much discussion in the area of genetics. There are various issues associated with it such as stem cell research, cloning and the creation of designer babies. All these issues do not differ much in the controversy which they generate. The fundamental nature of life and who gets to control

Page 13: GP Science and Technology Essays

and decide a person’s destiny often comes under scrutiny. Conservative religious groups such as the Roman Catholics who believe that creation is God’s prerogative and the libertarians who believe in Utilitarianism and the benefits such technology could bring have argued furiously, each side refusing to give in. Therefore, it would lead to many critics to assert that controversy and the divide between groups of people is a corollary of a scientist’s work. This argument is highly fallacious, as these differences in attitudes between different groups of people would exist, whether such sensitive issues such as genetic research come into play. What genetic research does is only bringing the gulf in opinions to the surface, making it more obvious. This might not be a disadvantage after all, for the first step to resolve any conflict is to identify it first. As such, genetic research might even be useful in bringing the world closer together and dispelling animosity.There is a popular saying which goes “Science is objective, but scientists are not”. I do not repudiate this statement, for after all, scientists are also human. However, to assume that all scientists are evil just because of a few black sheep is highly parochial. Besides, scientists are the people who have contributed most to Mankind in terms of alleviating tangible problems which our ancestors used to face, such as allowing us to prepare for natural disasters and preventing many deaths from diseases. They should be accorded due respect for that. Comments: Interesting insights, quite an atypical approach. I would have liked to see some discussion on GM foods. Good effort overall.