Deciding Actively
Listening for the Public Voice, by Robert Cook-Deegan and Jane Maienschein, discusses the issue of genetic engineering and the ethical dilemma and how the United States, government, and people are interacting in the struggle of the ethics behind genetic engineering. The authors present the facts that genetic engineering has laid in the grey area ever since it was first brought to in lab, and still continues to sit in that grey area. Genetic Engineering will occasionally pop up in the news and the argument will be reignited but quickly fizzle out till the next breakthrough appears on media. Cook-Deegan and Maienschein stats some of the most recent breakthroughs in genetic engineering which brings into perspective the relevance, …show more content…
With only occasional up cry and concern against an idea it will continue to grow regardless if the idea is moral or not. Without research most people will rely on quotes that were taken without context to support their previous notion. The fight over the morality of genetic engineering explained by Cook-Deegan and Maienschein is one that had been rarely looked over in a rational manner. The argument has been constantly in the grey area where the research can not be stopped but the government still does not technically support it, but have allowed private companies to continue to research it. The government has tried to remove themselves from the ethical struggle but that does not mean the struggle has stopped. Genetic engineering has been slowly advancing behind the opposition's back with only breakthroughs being published which spark the ethical battle into full force with it to only die back down within a couple weeks. Then the scientists can go back to their research without the public's support or …show more content…
This paper uses two main example which are very strong one is the “test tube” babies which were once looked down upon by society but now are widely accepted by the public. The other is heart transfusions which as Deegan-Cook and Maienshein wrote, “Initial revulsion at heart transplants gave way in the face of success” (Deegan-Cook, Maienshein, 1). Deegan-Cook and Maienshein used these example to warn the reader about what is currently going on with genetic engineering, and possibly genetic engineering could follow the same course the test tube babies and heart transfusions followed. This argument was effective but slightly deceiving. Original impression of the paper makes one think that the argument will argue for or against genetic engineering, but the true argument of the paper is about the public and how the public should decide “actively” as stated by Deegan-Cook and
Listening for the Public Voice, by Robert Cook-Deegan and Jane Maienschein, discusses the issue of genetic engineering and the ethical dilemma and how the United States, government, and people are interacting in the struggle of the ethics behind genetic engineering. The authors present the facts that genetic engineering has laid in the grey area ever since it was first brought to in lab, and still continues to sit in that grey area. Genetic Engineering will occasionally pop up in the news and the argument will be reignited but quickly fizzle out till the next breakthrough appears on media. Cook-Deegan and Maienschein stats some of the most recent breakthroughs in genetic engineering which brings into perspective the relevance, …show more content…
With only occasional up cry and concern against an idea it will continue to grow regardless if the idea is moral or not. Without research most people will rely on quotes that were taken without context to support their previous notion. The fight over the morality of genetic engineering explained by Cook-Deegan and Maienschein is one that had been rarely looked over in a rational manner. The argument has been constantly in the grey area where the research can not be stopped but the government still does not technically support it, but have allowed private companies to continue to research it. The government has tried to remove themselves from the ethical struggle but that does not mean the struggle has stopped. Genetic engineering has been slowly advancing behind the opposition's back with only breakthroughs being published which spark the ethical battle into full force with it to only die back down within a couple weeks. Then the scientists can go back to their research without the public's support or …show more content…
This paper uses two main example which are very strong one is the “test tube” babies which were once looked down upon by society but now are widely accepted by the public. The other is heart transfusions which as Deegan-Cook and Maienshein wrote, “Initial revulsion at heart transplants gave way in the face of success” (Deegan-Cook, Maienshein, 1). Deegan-Cook and Maienshein used these example to warn the reader about what is currently going on with genetic engineering, and possibly genetic engineering could follow the same course the test tube babies and heart transfusions followed. This argument was effective but slightly deceiving. Original impression of the paper makes one think that the argument will argue for or against genetic engineering, but the true argument of the paper is about the public and how the public should decide “actively” as stated by Deegan-Cook and