Dehumanization in Brave New World The topic is my response to the chapter included in the text book from Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, which tells us about how people are born and how they are “conditioned” in various methods in the fictional world in the future. My response is that people in the story are dehumanized since they do not behave like human beings, nor are they treated as human beings. One of reasons why I would think that is that they do not behave like human beings. First of all, people do not give birth to children or establish their own families any more. As human beings, even other animals, it is our nature to start a family, conceive babies, give birth to them and then nurture them in our own family.
If the proposal passes and I want to have the regulation declared invalid and overturned, I could challenge that the regulation does not have substantial evidence. In the case of the Gopher tortoise, if I did not want the Gopher tortoise to be placed on the endangered species list I could challenge the regulation by inquiring about population studies and the validity of the study. I live on a farm in South Georgia and our property is overrun with Gopher tortoises. You have to be careful in the pecan orchard and blueberry patch to watch for the Gopher’s burrow; we have had family members that have stepped in the Gopher’s burrow. Not only do you risk breaking a leg, but rattlesnakes are native to the area and share the burrow with the Gopher.
In a desperate effort to communicate with humans, the Bonobo chimpanzee, Kanzi, after losing his mother, began to point at symbols on a keyboard to ask for different things. Eventually Kanzi was able to associate these symbols with the spoken word. He didn’t necessarily have to be taught by being shown where to point or be rewarded with food. Kanzi was able to learn and associate different symbols with different words and meanings just so he could communicate with his human keepers. In one experiment, Kanzi’s keeping sat in a room with him and told him, without pointing to symbols, to do things that were impractical, such as putting pine needles in the refrigerator and pouring Perrier water into a jar of jelly.
Ludmila Kalenichenko Essay on article: “Building a Baby, With Few Ground Rules” By: Stephanie Saul Human Life Should Not Be Created This article was very shocking. I thought that surrogacy was used only as a last resort when a woman had problems carrying a child to term in her uterus, and another woman carried the couple’s biological child for them. This practice of assembling children from different components, where no one involved has any biological relation to the children, should be illegal. How in the world could 62 years old single man be expected to care for premature infants twins, and why was this allowed to go forward? The individuals behind the business of manufacturing babies are most certainly motivated by profitability, not charity.
A Word on Animal Rights Over the past few years, more and more people have been calling for nonhuman animals to be given similar rights to those that humans have in first world countries. One of these activists is Jeremy Rifkin, who is an economic theorist. He wrote an article that argues that animals are much more like us than we previously thought, and we should treat with the same respect that we give to other humans. However, I believe his argument is problematic and should not be taken seriously. For starters, he doesn't cite any credible sources as evidence.
Biology Issue Report Subject: Are the results of animal testing in the cosmetics industry relevant and applicable to humans? The testing of cosmetics on animals has been banned in the EU since 2009; however other countries around the world (such as the USA) still use animals in these tests. In an attempt to predict safety and effectiveness of cosmetics and toiletries, regulators in countries like America require companies to prove that their products are safe and harmless towards human beings. The cosmetics companies are required to conduct these experiments - they do not simply test on animals because they want to. Many thousands of animals (such as rabbits, mice, rats and guinea pigs) are used every year in the tests, but how reliable and applicable are the results to humans?
Dr. Richard Klausner, director of the US National Cancer Institute states: “We have cured mice of cancer for decades and it simply doesn’t work on humans.” Jim Mullen, chief executive of Biogen Idec states:” Boy, we can cure mice like nobody’s business, but when it comes to humans we have a harder time.” Radial Keratotomy, a surgery performed to enable better vision without glasses was perfected on rabbits but when tried on human patients, it failed-blinding them. Now I have a couple questions for you: What are we gaining from finding cures to human-like diseases in animals, if most fail when tried on humans? And why do keep doing it if doctors and other professionals keep saying its wrong? Being aware of what truly goes on in animal labs and acting against it will not only save and protect the lives of thousands of animals but it will also help advance the finding of cures for HUMAN diseases and the decrease of lost human lives. Animal experimentation goes back to writing of the Greeks in the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE.
Individual have diverse feelings for animals. Sorrowfully animal lovers cannot fight for their side, yet they still combat to save animal lives. Animals used as their companions while others view that animals are for scientific survey course only. Several scientists only think how to making their test flourish without knowing that animal they use are being abused and maltreated. Not all tests are relevant to human health.
Is Animal Testing Necessary? Do we see birds as an animal flying around in the sky or as a lifeless creature to be tested on? Do we see mice as being cute, class pets or the next control in an experiment? People today should be more aware of how animal testing may one day kill off a number of groups of animals, and can eventually harm the human race. People have yet to realize that their favorite type of deodorant or those good-smelling fragrances they like to put on were once tested on animals.
Author Stephen Gould nailed it on the head when he named his essay, “Nonmoral Nature.” His essay provokes our thoughts on nonhuman motivation. Since animals do not have a rationale backing up their actions, then they must act solely on motivation. One potential reasoning behind an animal’s motivation arises from the passion and love toward its own offspring (Gould 1209). This theory can be correlated to Nancy Kress’s short story, “Beggars in Spain.” In this story, a genetic break-through leaves the option open for parents to decide whether or not they want their children to be genetically modified to not need sleep. When considering what thoughts went through Roger Camden’s mind while choosing to have a sleepless daughter, is it particularly intriguing to connect his logic to animal instinct; It leaves us speculating whether he did so because it gave her an competitive upper-hard, or was it on the basis of true love to which he thought she would want this for herself.