Over the past few decades, many animals have become extinct either due to natural causes or humans. Recently scientists and researchers believe that animals can be brought back to existence through a process called de-extinction. Some believe that bringing them back to life will make up for the wrong of extinction as stated in Text 1 : 3Q The Ethics of Species ‘De -Extinction’ by Angela Herring. However others claim that because of de-extinction, extinct species are being brought back but millions of other species in the ecosystem are at risk of extinction, stated in Text 3 : Case against Species Revival. Extinct species should not be brought back into existence because it will put many species at risk and will create controversy in
…show more content…
In text 1 it states, “some have claimed that bringing back extinct species that were caused to go extinct by human practices would, to some extent help make up for the wrong of the extinction”. (Lines 24-26) Therefore the author states bringing back extinct species can repair the damage and loss of previous species. However, de-extinction of species can disturb the present day ecosystem and disrupt the focus of people on today’s species. Instead of the de-extinction of species they should try to keep current species from going into extinction. Currently many animals are at risk of extinction due to pollution, overharvesting and habitat destruction. (Text 4) In text 3 it states “de -extinction tend to resurrect single charismatic species yet millions of species are at risk of extinction.” In other words there are many species at the brink of extinction yet scientists are concerned about the de-extinction of species. In addition it is believed that de-extinction will become a “moral hazard”. (Text 4) Similarly humans won’t think about how animals are being treated, whether it is helping or hurting them. They seem to think that of animals go back in to extinction, they can brought back through scientific methods. This is unethical because it is wrong to abuse any animals and by supporting de-extinction, it suggests that
In text 1 it states, “some have claimed that bringing back extinct species that were caused to go extinct by human practices would, to some extent help make up for the wrong of the extinction”. (Lines 24-26) Therefore the author states bringing back extinct species can repair the damage and loss of previous species. However, de-extinction of species can disturb the present day ecosystem and disrupt the focus of people on today’s species. Instead of the de-extinction of species they should try to keep current species from going into extinction. Currently many animals are at risk of extinction due to pollution, overharvesting and habitat destruction. (Text 4) In text 3 it states “de -extinction tend to resurrect single charismatic species yet millions of species are at risk of extinction.” In other words there are many species at the brink of extinction yet scientists are concerned about the de-extinction of species. In addition it is believed that de-extinction will become a “moral hazard”. (Text 4) Similarly humans won’t think about how animals are being treated, whether it is helping or hurting them. They seem to think that of animals go back in to extinction, they can brought back through scientific methods. This is unethical because it is wrong to abuse any animals and by supporting de-extinction, it suggests that