Environmental Ethics Reflective Essay #2

Directions: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement:

"Knowing what I know now, I am morally obligated to become a vegetarian."

Express your agreement or disagreement in a 1 to 1 and 1/2 page reflection essay. Your introduction should state your position and should also mention the reasons that you will develop in support of your position in the body paragraphs. Your body paragraphs (2 to 3) should each defend a distinct argument in defense of your position. You can assume that the reader has read what you have read this semester.

Medical Ethics: Reflective Essay #2 on the Therapy/Enhancement Distinction

Directions: Respond to the statement written below in 1 to 1 and 1/2 pages. Use standard 12 point font, double-spacing, and 1 inch margins. This essay is very brief, and hence you do not need an introduction of more than two or three sentences. In your introduction you should state whether you agree or disagree with the following statement, and briefly list the reasons that you will develop in defense of your position in your body paragraphs. Your body paragraphs should be roughly five to six sentences a piece and each one must develop one of the arguments in defense of your position that you have mentioned in the introduction. A conclusion is not necessary.

"It is unethical to devote a significant portion of our countries medical resources to the enhancement (as opposed to therapy) of our mental and physical abilities."

Kass on Ageless Bodies and Happy Souls: Reading Questions

The following questions come from pp. 9-16 of the Kass article. Email me your answers by Monday 11/21. The reading might be a bit difficult so take it slow and try to completely grasp the main idea of each paragraph before moving on to the next one.


1. On pages 9 and 10 Kass introduces his topic. (a) What are some possible bad uses of biotechnology? (b) What particular question will be the main focus of his essay? (c) In the last paragraph of the first section (p.10) he notes something significant about medical advances that have already been achieved. According to Kass, have these advances promoted happiness? Why or why not?

2. On p. 12, in the section entitled, "The Problem of Terminology" Kass expresses his own concerns about the ethical significance of the therapy/enhancement distinction. (a) What are some of his concerns? They may overlap what Resnik has said.

3. In the section entitled, "Three Obvious Objections" he states three reasons why one should be concerned about new technologies that enhance the bodies abilities and produce content and happy states of mind. (a) What are these three objections? (b) Regarding the third issue, which concerns freedom and coercion, Kass lists several ways in which the pursuit of perfection can lead to various forms of coercion. What are some of these ways?

Medical Ethics:The Moral Significance of the Therapy/Enhancement Distinction

Introduction: A common concern with genetic engineering is that there is something unethical about attempting to modify the human genome so that humans with "better than normal" characterists (e.g. strength, I.Q., etc.) are produced. In comparison, genetic therapy for the purpose of treating, disease, illness, and various dysfunctions and disorders is considered to be morally legitimate. This article begins with an examination of the difficulties that are involved in making the therapy/enhancement distinction due to the difficulties that surround the project of defining an illness. The author (David Resnik) then questions the view that enhancement is unethical. Answer these questions and mail them to my inbox by Monday the 7th.

1. On page 210 in the section entitled, "The Concepts of Health and Disease" Resnik discusses several approaches to defining what is normal and healthy and what is diseased, abnormal, or unhealthy. In the paragraph that begins "The bioethics literature...." two definitions of normal are given. (a) Describe each of these views. Also, try and provide an example that illustrates each definition. (b) In the following paragraph a further approach to defining "normal" is described. Try and put this view in your own words. The rest of this section offers criticisms of these three definitions. We will look at some of these objections in class.

2. In the section entitled, "The Goals of Medicine", Resnik looks at attempts to argue that enhancement is unethical because it violates the goals of medicine. Several goals of medicine are listed. (a) What are some of these goals? (b) Can various forms of enhancement fit under of these goals? If yes, provide examples.

3. In the section entitled, "Our Humanness" Resnik looks at several ethical theories and concludes that none of them entail that it is wrong to tamper with human nature as it is presently constructed. In the last paragraph of the first column of p. 213 Resnik argues that both a utilitarian ethic and a Kantian ethic allow for at least some genetic enhancements. (a) How is utilitarianism defined in the text? (We have discussed this theory twice in class) (b) Why would a utilitarian be in favor of at least some genetic enhancements? (c) What is a Kantian concerned with violating according to this paragraph? (d) What are some alterations that a Kantian would object to?

4. In the last paragraph of p. 213 another argument is given against tampering with the human genetic code. (a) What is this argument? (b) How does Resnik respond to this argument? On page 214 Resnik states a common religious or theological objection to tampering with the human genetic code. (c) What is the argument? (d) How does Resnik respond to it?