Humn3991 A4

Posted: March 27th, 2020

Humn3991 A4

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Humn3991 A4

Part A

1. Reductionism describes a classification of methodological arguments regarding the interrelation between varieties of scientific domains. Reductionism prompts the association between properties and elucidations in one scientific domain to an alternative scientific domain that is characterized by lower levels of organization. Reductionism is essential to the debate regarding the pursuit of biotechnology in the contemporary society as it concentrates on the reduction of classical genetics to molecular biology (Rubin, 2004).
2. Three ethical issues involved with biotechnology include the nature of safety, the non-coerced pursuit, and the non-faddish uses of biotechnology (Boss, 2012).
3. Immanuel Kant is one of the most popular philosophers of history who made a significant contribution to the concept of human dignity. According to Kant, human beings possess an innate worth known as dignity that renders them valuable (Kant, 2017).
4. Somatic cell bioengineering is a process through which artificial tissues, organs, or organ components are used to generate cell forming the body of an organism.
5. Intentionality is a concept that describes the ability of minds to represent things and state of the society.
6. Neuromania is the concept in which philosophers and practitioners attempt to explain consciousness explicitly through physical processes.
7. The primary argument against cloning revolves around the ethical nature of the issue. The ethical challenges of avoiding risk and harm to the body remain questionable as practitioners query the safe use of perfected powers (Kass, 2003). A significant argument surrounding cloning revolves around the existing societal institutions of parental organization. It is the arraigned genetic absolutism of one cohort over the other.

Part B

1. The promises of biotechnology include access to cure to diseases, the enhancement of life and obliteration of psychic and somatic suffering. While the pursuit of biotechnology poses a significant benefit to the scientific realm, it relays some challenges that threaten its pursuit (Kass, 2010). Among the problems created by biotechnology include the exploitation of instruments of bioterrorism through the formation of engineered drug-resistant microorganisms or drugs that eliminate reminiscence. It also poses a significant threat to the security, freedom, and humanity.
2. Kass considers cloning and biotechnology dehumanizing because of a number of reasons. According to Kass, cloning offers the promise of super-humanization that poses an inherent threat to the existence of humans (Kass, 2003). The threat is based on the rationale that it induces attention to the existence of being a human and being as a human. An attempt to reconstruct a person to more than a person is considered dehumanizing, as people need to be offered specific regard regarding respect.
3. Bioengineering allows practitioners to create replicas of people. In this case, such people can perceive and learn similar to authentic humans making them as valuable. In this case, clones are entitled to various rights similar to that of humans. They possess a right to education and employment. They would possess the right not to be cloned through refraining from issuing their genetic markup.

Part C

How might biotechnology change family relationships?

 Family relationships are the most intricate and essential components of a community as it defines the approach that people will take towards survival. It is the most intimate and eternal aspect of relationships that develops gradually as people become older and generations emerge (Berlatsky, 2013). Biotechnology and genetic engineering have created an avenue where families that do not possess offspring and experience a challenge in their unity can pursue genetic cloning to acquire a child. Such families often experience a gap in the completeness with their inclination of the family as a combination of parents and children. The perception that experiences in the earlier years, where a family consisted of parents and children cannot be eliminated has been challenged by the possibility in which people can change their identity. This includes setting up families through the effort of genetic engineering and combining them with former affiliations (Macer, 1994). While the association may include a mixture of affiliations, it is likely to create unity and understanding among spouses.

            The family poses a significant impact on the pursuit of decisions and personal activities. Arguably, this can be seen in a variety of cultures such as the Chinese, where the entire family is involved in the decision-making process. While seeking treatment options, practitioners are required to find the input of the family to ensure that they pursue alternatives that will satisfy the needs of the patient. It plays an essential role in the autonomous process, which ensures that harm is experienced at all levels of the family. In the biotechnological clinical process, relational autonomy provides that members engage intimately in pursuing a collective right (Lee, 2007). Ailments such as Cancer have been cured using genetic modification to ensure that the health status of the patient is restored to its original state. In such cases, the input of the family is crucial since it relieves the physician or practitioner the burden of selecting a treatment that would not be preferred by the family. Therefore, biotechnology strengthens family cohesion by ensuring that they possess and maintain a solid decision regarding the pursuit of treatment.

            Biotechnology has been associated with the ability to destroy family relationships through allowing despotic features to be pursued by parents. More often, parents may exert biotechnological power over their children to control various aspects of life (Kass, 2003). For instance, some parents may prefer to alter the genetic markup of a child with the perception that they are going to perform better in their schoolwork. Despotism within families may be considered an unethical concept as parents perform certain activities without the knowledge of their children despite their young ages. Control over a person’s genotype is a form of actualizing control as it limits a person from achieving full potential in their natural state (Macer, 1994). Children who learn about this change at a later age are likely to become repulsive owing to the incompetence displayed by their parents, which threatens the association between parents and children making it hard for them to communicate.

            Biotechnology is also likely to affect the relationship between families as teenagers and youth come to terms with their identity. Staunch religious beliefs have grounded some family settings that value life and natural existence. However, genetic research has increased the access and pursuit of knowledge on genes, their functioning and methods of control. In this case, various people have transformed from male to female gender arguing that it is what they identify with (Peacock, 2010). They are often labeled as transgender people. In highly religious families, changing gender might imply contending with God’s creation and attempting to disprove his dominance as the creator. Most likely, this will to lead to misunderstandings. In communal settings, a person may be excommunicated and discriminated against affecting their perception towards the family.

References

Berlatsky, N. (2013). Genetic engineering. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.Bottom of Form

Boss, J. (2012). Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Top of Form

Genetic engineering, cloning, and stem cell research: In Analyzing moral issues (pp. 123-136). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Kant, I. (2017). Kant: The metaphysics of morals. Cambridge University Press.

 Bottom of Form

Kass, L. R. (2003). Ageless bodies, happy souls: Biotechnology and the pursuit of perfection. The New Atlantis, 1, 9-28.

Kass, L. (2010). The wisdom of repugnance: Why we should ban the cloning of humans. In J. Boss (Ed.),  Analyzing moral issues (pp. 154-162). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Lee, S. C. (2007). The family, medical decision-making, and biotechnology: Critical reflections on Asian moral perspectives. New York, NY: Springer.

Macer, D. R. J. (1994). Perception of risks and benefits of in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering, and biotechnology. Social Science & Medicine, 38(1), 23-33.

Peacock, K. W. (2010). Biotechnology and genetic engineering. InfoBase Publishing.

Rubin, C. T. (2004). Man or machine? The New Atlantis, 4, 31-37.