Category: Ethics

Tweaking Genes to Save Species

April 18, 2016

Should humans intentionally try to kill of a species? What if this tactic resulted in the complete extinction of these mosquitos? What if this extinction resulted in saving human lives?

“BIOTECHNOLOGISTS have engineered the mosquito that spreads the Zika virus to pass a lethal gene to its offspring. Another team of researchers has devised a way to spread sterility through the mosquito population, using a technique called gene drive to wipe out the offending insects.

“If regulators approve this genetic tinkering, these insects could become a powerful weapon against the spread of mosquito-borne diseases to humans. But bugs like these, and the techniques used to create them, might have another role to play: helping to protect the earth’s biodiversity.”

Another article on the same topic.

https://www.statnews.com/2016/02/03/zika-gene-drive-gene-editing/

The New Case for Hunting Hunters, tree-huggers, and animal welfare advocates should be allies.

April 14, 2016

“In the absence of people, nature would establish its own balance among species. But having shaped (and disrupted) the natural environment so extensively, humans can’t very well wash their hands of responsibility for what happens when certain species over-expand. Hunting is one way to keep wildlife numbers in check, for the good of people, plants, land and other animals.”

http://reason.com/archives/2013/12/05/the-new-case-for-hunting

The Politics of Bangladesh’s Genocide Debate

April 6, 2016

What does this article tell us about the role of history in creating a national identify? What does this tell us about how current circumstances shape our perceptions of the past?

Is it ever ethical to censor scholarship or the media? What if the three million figure was accurate? Inaccurate?

Is it ethical to make illegal debates and scholarship questioning the death toll of the Holocaust (it is illegal in much of Europe but not in the United States)?

“Where does the truth about the numbers lie? The three million figure was popularized by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the leader of the Awami League in 1971, the country’s first president and the father of the current prime minister. Mujib, as he is popularly known, is a revered figure, particularly within the Awami League. But his biographer, Sayyid A. Karim, who was also Sheikh Rahman’s first foreign secretary, viewed the number as ‘a gross exaggeration.'”

“For others, however, questions are necessary on this and other aspects of the 1971 war, including the widespread killings of members of the Bihari ethnic group, who supported the Pakistanis during the conflict, by Bengali nationalists. We should question this because nationalist narratives about the past often serve contemporary political interests, and we should beware of an orthodoxy being used to silence dissent.”

Is Voting Out of Self-Interest Wrong?

April 4, 2016

“Some philosophers argue that self-interested voting is always wrong and that we should vote instead for what we see as best for society as a whole (the “common good”). There may be cases where my self-interest happens to coincide with the common good. A tax cut or a minimum wage from which I profit may be good for the economy as a whole. But it’s naïve to think that’s true of every tax deduction and credit that serves a personal or corporate self-interest. It’s tempting, therefore, to think that I’m wrong to vote my self-interest when it’s opposed to the common good.”

In N.F.L., Deeply Flawed Concussion Research and Ties to Big Tobacco

March 24, 2016

This article connects to some interesting TOK issues. Clearly we can discuss the ethics, or lack of ethics, in the NFL’s manipulation of data to disprove conclusions that undermine its business.

This also illustrates how math can help us understand and possibly prove complex issues like the connection between football and health issues like concussions and CTE.  Rather than observing or intuiting a causal relationship between two phenomenon, we have to use math along with the methods of proof in the natural sciences to establish truth and construct knowledge. By misrepresenting data, one might reach incorrect conclusions, which seems to have been the case here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/25/sports/football/nfl-concussion-research-tobacco.html

A second article about how flawed data undermines our ability to construct knowledge.

“Researchers primed to believe that the NFL has concussions under control, a data set that’s missing important information, and publication in a journal edited by a consultant to the NFL — it looks more like an attempt to create evidence for a predetermined message than good science. But even if we throw out these studies, we can’t yet conclude that football inevitably leads to lasting brain damage.”

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-nfls-shoddy-science-means-we-know-even-less-about-concussions/

Should Parents of Children With Severe Disabilities Be Allowed to Stop Their Growth?

March 22, 2016

“Caring for people with severe mental and physical limitations becomes vastly harder as they get older. Some parents believe medically stunting them is the answer — but is it ethical?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/magazine/should-parents-of-severely-disabled-children-be-allowed-to-stop-their-growth.html?_r=0

 

OK Cupid: “We Experiment On Human Beings!”

March 11, 2016

The ethics of human experimentation on the internet has been greatly debated, especially in light of the revelation that Facebook engaged in experiments on its users without their consent. Another site, OK Cupid, proudly states that they experiment on humans and whether or not you realize it, if you’re on the internet then you’re being experimented on all the time.

“We noticed recently that people didn’t like it when Facebook ‘experimented’ with their news feed. Even the FTC is getting involved. But guess what, everybody: if you use the Internet, you’re the subject of hundreds of experiments at any given time, on every site. That’s how websites work.”

http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/we-experiment-on-human-beings/

Should Therapists Analyze Presidential Candidates?

March 7, 2016

“To diagnose conditions in someone we’ve never met — let alone offer treatment recommendations — is fraught both ethically and scientifically. Assessing patients face to face and finding out their experiences and history, much of which is private, and has perhaps never been disclosed to anyone, is essential. Otherwise, we risk making big errors and fostering confusion.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/07/opinion/campaign-stops/should-therapists-analyze-presidential-candidates.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

The Man Who Studies Ignorance

March 6, 2016

“A new era of ignorance

““We live in a world of radical ignorance, and the marvel is that any kind of truth cuts through the noise,” says Proctor. Even though knowledge is ‘accessible’, it does not mean it is accessed, he warns.

““Although for most things this is trivial – like, for example, the boiling point of mercury – but for bigger questions of political and philosophical import, the knowledge people have often comes from faith or tradition, or propaganda, more than anywhere else.”

“Proctor found that ignorance spreads when firstly, many people do not understand a concept or fact and secondly, when special interest groups – like a commercial firm or a political group – then work hard to create confusion about an issue. In the case of ignorance about tobacco and climate change, a scientifically illiterate society will probably be more susceptible to the tactics used by those wishing to confuse and cloud the truth.”

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20160105-the-man-who-studies-the-spread-of-ignorance?mc_cid=c28053bf7b&mc_eid=34e2887073