This proceeds with the question; what advancements are moral? I believe that any science, innovation, study, or sort of exploration must be morally just, intended to better our understanding of the world, and be created with intention to improve any part of society. For example, the formation of the first rocket ship was monumental in bringing exploration to the new frontier and impacted our society for the better. Therefore this invention would be considered moral and for positive advancement. On the contrary, the scientific creation of something such as the nuclear bomb could be considered scientific expansion for the worse as it can provide horrible outcomes and is lethal if put in the wrong hands; thus classified as
Opinions in society differ over whether there should be any genetic manipulation of humans. Some people believe curing diseases such as cystic fibrosis and other genetically disabling diseases should be considered ethical and acceptable, but advancing human intelligence, strength and personal characteristics is not. Others believe that genetic manipulation of humans of any form is unethical and therefore should not be done while others believe it is advantageous and advancements should be pursued. One of the main reasons people are opposed to genetic manipulation of human beings is because it could go wrong. It is very hard to determine all the potential effects of gene therapy.
If there is potential to save several lives by doing research on one thing, why not do it. If embryonic stem cell research was legal and governmentally funded we could save many lives from many diseases such as cancer, diabetes and spinal injuries. Stem cells can be used to repair vision making more people able to work and possibly increasing our
With these diseases preventable, it's possible to save billions of lives around the world. So now knowing the potential to change the face of human disease and alleviate suffering, is Embryonic Stem Cell research really worth debating
VII. On top of freedom, I also value natural selection, and mother nature. To step away from humans, animal engineering can also be immoral. VIII. Bernhald pallson said, “ we are going to create oraganisms that mother nature never thought of”.
According to Idziak, the principle of double effect, “the act itself must be morally good or neutral, only the good consequences of the act must be intended, the good effect must not be produced by means of the evil effect, and there must be some weighty evil for permitting the evil” (p.16). Abortion due to the fetus having an abnormality falls under this category. Giving the fetuses life guarantees death and suffering in so many areas. According to Idziak, “Aborting an abnormal fetus prevents suffering for the child…giving life to the fetus would cause more harm to it than denying it life through abortion. Because of the poor quality of life, the child would have if born, abortion can be seen as being in the best interest of the child” (p.
Gattaca shows us how the world will be a better place if people were genetically altered, but it also shows us how the world would be a tough place for people who weren’t genetically
Instead of profiting from a high yield the producers will lose customers because of their anxiety towards the foreign milk. Hypothetically the producers would have benefited from the advancement, but realistically, nations worldwide would want a guarantee that their people are not going to be harmed. It is natural for people to be scared of change, and the fear of genetically altered food is a prime example of
As James Rachels said, “Cultural Relativism might be true, but it might lead to some consequences, such as no longer being able to say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to ours, or we could decide whether actions are right or wrong just by consulting the standards of our society and even the idea of moral progress would be called into doubt.” Cultural Relativism has some good advantages; it helps us to keep an open mind about other people´s beliefs. On the other hand, Cultural Relativism is not a good system that should be followed by each culture separately because there are some universal rules that should be followed, for instance no murder. Laws should be created under morality, and they might not be perfect, but they are the best rules that we as humans have. Even though societies still have arguments about their beliefs because it is impossible to have complete peace because of our differences. For example, For the Greeks it was believed that it was wrong to eat the dead, whereas the Callatians believed it was right to eat the dead, or the Eskimos saw nothing wrong with infanticide, whereas Americans believed infanticide is immoral.
Despite of this believe, less do people know that too many technologies lead to obesity as people are not physically active. Hence, it is crucial to realize the purpose of having a gadget in order to prevent buying unnecessary technology. Finally, technology is contributing to obesity because of awareness. In this modern world, everyone dreams of being in the technology savvy group. The society would spend a lot of money to buy all sorts of equipments due to the view that technology makes life easier.