Author Archives: Anthony Pescetto
Digital Project Proposal
I’m still not sure which to do for my paper because of the subject I have chosen. I will be arguing how the in the nature vs. nurture argument in sexual orientation, the biological component (nature) decides it, more specifically I will be dealing with the case of Chaz Bono. What I was going to try to do was possibly create a 3D object of a brain, small one, in some creative way. I’m still not sure how exactly to do that yet or what exact angle I’m going to take.
The 3D object I personally feel to be a bit simpler, I guess. I honestly do not like this side of the research project because of the area of concern we are dealing with, bioethics. I just don’t see how this is going to be enjoyable. Anyways, I think the idea is pretty cool and I’m gonna try to use the 3D printer, most likely for a small brain because the argument I’m making all centers around this organ. I want to see, however, how to make it in the simplest way so that it is easy to print, but still in the method I want to convey my argument.
HELP
Hey everyone, I really need some help. I can’t think of anything! For the last couple days I’ve been trying to think of a topic and my mind just draws a blank. I have been trying to lean towards something involving animal rights/research with animals, but I have no idea how to connect that with media! Please, I just need some brainstorming ideas, if anyone can help out. And if anyone needs the same, I’ll try my best to help you guys out too. Thanks everyone.
Is Social Media good or bad?
Something that I was just sort of thinking about recently was the presence of social media in today’s world. I was just thinking about all the people posting things about the election and voicing their opinions. Yeah I was kinda annoyed about the numerous things posted throughout the campaigns and election day, but I figured I guess its good that everyone can just put whatever they think and believe no matter how simple or complicated (unless in twitter’s 140 character limit) on a public forum. But it also made me think, it may be not as great as it seems considering everything else I’ve seen from Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Its become something that has completely taken away our privacy, nowadays we can figure almost everything about a person from just “creeping” on their Facebook profile or following them on twitter. I’m starting to think that this is actually backfiring and becoming more of a bad thing than a good thing.
First of all, we’re losing our “right to privacy” the more we post on these media sites. Companies are now making advertisements directly to us, they know everything about our lives. Both Facebook and Twitter give all of our information to companies that want to target certain people. Doesn’t that make you feel a little uneasy? Plus, when going for job interviews, that company can just search you up and make a decision based on your profiles. We have completely exposed our private lives to the public! We can no longer claim privacy because of the internet, if not used responsibly. I was just thinking about this the last couple days and thought it’d be some nice food for thought and to just give some advice about being careful what you say/post cause you never know what the future may bring. Especially in technology and on the internet, or Worldwide Web.
Not too Bad
This paper is a bit different from the last. It is because I have my ideas formulated and I know/understand what I am writing about, or at least going to write about, much better than before. I already have my my introduction and thesis statement written down, but I feel that my thesis could be much better than it is right now. This has been my main problem, writing a really strong thesis, or at least one that I am happy with. This is hard because I am so hard on my writing sometimes that I believe it is never good enough.
Another really strong difficulty I am having, but I believe will be overcome much easier, is finding quotes to fit what I want to say because it is an extensive book, but I feel this will be easy to overcome. I believe that this essay will be challenging but my ideas will flow much better from the last paper so I think that its not going to be too bad.
The challenge I’m facing…
I am having a lot of trouble with trying to incorporate my interests and apply them to what we’re doing in class. Everything we did last week I felt was true and that somehow we need to make these blog posts much more interesting, but at this moment, I have no clue what to do. By my next post I hope that I can do a bit more, but as of right now I’m still trying to sort out how to do this. This wil be a challenge for me, but I accept this challenge and will accomplish it.
For now though, I’m gonna talk a bit about Henrietta Lacks so this post has at least a little bit of bioethical material. I found it really interesting that someone else had a similar situation of Henrietta, as discussed in chapter 25. John Moore was also taken advantage of when he had a form of cancer, but he was still alive and could fight it. What I found interesting was even after about 30 years, the same methods were still taking place by doctors, how they continue to take advantage of patients without their knowledge. Its a scary thought that not until recently has ethical procedures been followed, but not without drastic effects on the people before this method changed. The next chapter was even more powerful because it tells of the ill effects of these methods on the many people that were affected by it, mainly Henrietta’s family. Its a powerful chapter that really puts sympathy into the reader but also a mistrust in doctors. Its a scary thought if we cannot trust some of the most highly educated people in our society.
This blog was probably kinda boring, but I accept the challenge to try and make it better in the very near future.
How far will we go?
The story of Henrietta Lacks is one of the most intriguing and fascinating stories of the 20th Century. Its also one that many people have not heard of until recently. Her story brings up a few major questions on ethics in science, but I feel the main one is “How far will we go?” In other words, what extreme lengths are we willing to take for the advancements of science? Henrietta’s cells were taken from her without her knowledge, but had such a positive effect on the world, as well as, created a multi-billion dollar industry. Her family never saw any of the money, the benefits, and Henrietta died in agonizing pain without any knowledge of what had happened. The real ethical issue here is about consent and whether or not they should have known about the cells, but a see a bigger issue here. The big issue is that now humans are being used like guinea pigs.
The animal rights and protections from being taken advantage of by science is a problem, but now humans are being used in the same way. This is a case from the 1950s and apparently people were being used since even before then. It is a scary thought that now humans are being seen as just another resource to take advantage of. The epigraph used in The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is a good portrayal of how a person is not only just another abstract being, but something more complicated, much more complicated. With this in mind there is not only an ethical responsibility for scientists to follow when using humans, but a form of respect towards the human race because we are not just another resource to be used. Today, such things still occur, but with consent of the individuals in drug companies, but we can never really know that what is being given to us is really safe or thoroughly tested before it comes to us. The drug companies can be taking advantage of people who are willing to test the subject without anyone knowing.
First Draft perplexity
This paper was difficult for me because I just didn’t know where or how to start. It didn’t make much sense to me at all as I read over the prompt and what we were supposed to do. Even when I finally got it, it took me just as long if not longer to start of writing my paper. I’m nervous on how my paper as a whole turned out. Was I persuasive enough? Did I get my message across? Was it ven grammatically correct?! These are just a few things that pop into my head as I write any papers and especially after I hand in the first draft.
After I finished writing, I read over my essay and basically my face was just like that meme Phil put up in his blog, I had no idea what I just wrote. I revised it numerous times until I was satisfied, but those same questions lingered. I am just awaiting how my first draft did to see if hopefully the answers to my inquires are positive or negative and take it from there.
The Heart of the Matter: Insensitivity towards other Species
Is a human life considered more valuable than every other type of life on the planet? This is the type of question that ethics presents to situations in the scientific world for proposed “advancements” by using animals as mere tools. The action introduced in the article “The Heart of the Matter” is to use Chimpanzee hearts to “build a ‘bridge'” for heart transplant patients so they can live a bit longer until they are able to obtain a human heart of their own for permanent use. The problem that I have with this and most people would is the fact that the heart of the chimpanzee is just being used for the ends of humans; this procedure isn’t something necessary especially since it is most likely not to work, as stated in the article. I am all for the betterment of mankind and helping people survive, but I have a problem when animals, especially one such as a chimpanzee that is so similar to us, are used when the end factor may not justify the means.
In the commentary section of the article, Strachan Donnelley devises an argument in which I agree with. He focuses on the ethical questions presented when not going to an extreme side. He goes on to say this use of chimpanzee hearts its not ethically right nor is it morally right because it will result in the eventual extinction of the animal species. This is my same sentiment on this subject. The people that may receive these hearts will live longer for only a few more days while the chimpanzees giving the hearts will die. This factor added to the fact that these animals are already endangered will result in the complete annihilation of the species. I felt Willard Gaylin made a very good argument, but did not convince me. He focuses on the pathos of the argument to try and take in account the emotions of the readers to seeing and agreeing with him on this issue. There are, however, more factors that apply besides the ones he presents. Homo sapiens are the most intelligent beings on the planet, but that gives us the most responsibility to ensure that we do not take advantage of this power. As one of the most popular saying goes from the infamous spiderman comics, “With great power comes great responsibility”. This applies to humans in various ways especially with our animal counterparts and how we treat them.
I end with a simple cartoon that I found to be a good representation of what we should do for animals before using them for whatever advancement we want.
UNESCO: Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights
The reading for this week was the Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). I want to first focus on the actual definition of Bioethics, which I deduced from the reading. Bioethics is a study of the moral and ethical responsibilities that all human beings have in all medical, scientific and research fields. This is the simple, elementary definition of bioethics, but reading through this declaration gave me a realization that it is much more involved and complex. One part of the realm of bioethics that interested me was the Aim presented in Article 2, part g, which stated “to safeguard and promote the interests of the present and future generations. Now the idea of safeguarding and promoting the interests of the present are expected, but the concept of preserving the future has only come up recently. Within the last 10 years, the preserving of the environment and of the world has been of utmost importance so that the generations after us can enjoy the faculties of this planet and the innovations we have brought into this world. For me, this created a whole new spectrum of bioethics because it broadened the reach of its importance.
Another aspect of Bioethics that surprised me in the Declaration was Article 13. This article basically is calling for a sort of worldwide unity and cooperation between all nations. It initiates another angle of equality socially and medically across the world for all people. Now due to many political, religious, and other numerous factors, many nations can not come to an agreement on many issues. Even within nations, such as ours, certain issues are divided almost right down the middle with two different sides, such as with abortion. I do not want to go on a tangent on the abortion issue, but I felt like this declaration does not hinder nor help either side of the issue. It was something that I was looking for as I read and found that through this document conclusion can be drawn for both pro-life and pro-choice sides. I noticed that the declaration did not want to make arguments or statements for certain controversial issues, but rather took an angle to provide a guideline to every nation and organization of how to proceed on protecting everyone’s rights and lives, but still allowing them to push for more innovations. With the coming election in this country I feel that bioethics must play an important issue, more so than it ever has in the past. We must take in consideration so much and I am not asking for an answer to this question, but just for everyone to think about, What candidate will help this country follow these guidelines as best as possible and is it even possible to follow every single one? These are just two questions that I thought about as I read this document.