This is a must watch. Beyond her tales of harry potter and his friends, another side of Rowling is revealed here. Her wit and insights will take your personal takes on life to another dimension.
Here's the 1st part:
2nd part:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm28K-Dgfxs&feature=related
3rd part:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cElk8cQk2VY&feature=related
My favourite quote in that speech is this-
"Imagination is not only the uniquely human capacity to envision that which is not, and therefore the fount of all invention and innovation. In its arguably most transformative and revelatory capacity, it is the power that enables us to empathise with humans whose experiences we have never shared."
I've never seen imagination that way before I watched this speech. It's a gift and something humans need to cherish. We can't let apathy take this ability away from us for it will only make us inhumane. Such is one of the purposes of Mankind- to empathise and stand as stewards of God in the service of our fellowmen.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Copy Me
Ok I admit this isn't a post on racial division. After much bugging from kandace, i've decided to continue from my draft on cloning. Hardly anything was written previously and I can understand why. I felt amibivalent towards cloning. To be more precise, human cloning, maybe reproductive cloning as a whole. There's nothing wrong with cloning somatic human cells (normal body cells); the newspapers recently featured a dying skin cancer patient saved by his own cloned cells. This is the first time an patient's immune system was used to combat cancer in its late stages. Immunotherapy, the name of the technique, may eventually prove to be a substitute of standard chemotherapy and radiation in fighting cancer. There might come a day when we can see cancer patients retain their hair despite having gone through cancer therapy. Who knows?
While flipping through my GP notes related to this widely contentious issue, I saw this quote by John Stuart Mill (philosopher and economist)- "It should be forbidden from imposing its religious beliefs on a dissenting minority, even indirectly." So, I've decided that in taking my stance, I shan't use religion as an explicit reason. Religious reasons on human cloning aren't valid in this world nor are they considered rational to others.
From the animal cloning, test results have shown that in simply begetting dolly, "277 eggs were used to create 29 embryos, which only produced three lambs at birth, only one of which lived" (source: wiki). For only one experiment, 29 embryos had to be used to generate an animal clone. Maybe 29 is too small a number but if we change our mindset and look at these animal embryos as human embryo, perspectives may change. Imagine the millions of embryos, human embryos that we could possibly kill if we were to embark on a course of human cloning experiments. But of course, there are advocates of cloning who refute this argument by saying that if we don't try we won't get anything. The potential benefits of cloning will come mainly in the form of organ replacement. No more debate on organ trade HA. Yet, as a pro-life individual, it's hard to see the benefit in sacrificing millions of embryos (think babies though not quite there), in return for saving some patients. It just doesn't weigh.
But there's a flip side to this issue. What about embryos that are aborted? Do we trash them or do we allow scientists to take this as an opportunity? Perhaps it's better to utilise these resources for discovery in this arena of science than to simply discard these unwanted embryos. But if we allow unwanted embryos to be taken in, this can breed another issue somewhat similar to the organ trade debate- this could spring up sellers of embryos or this may even justify abortion as a contribution to science. The Bioethics Advisory Committee in Singapore adopted a
position on the moral status of embryo that deems it unethical to research on an embryo that had reached its 14th day limit from fertilisation. By then, it would have developed a form of "irreversible individuality". This position is shared by many countries. Knowing that women are mostly unaware of their pregnancies till like weeks after, most aborted embryos won't be taken in after all. So this worrying issue is set aside and I wouldn't want to delve or drag into abortion. Shall save that for another day.
There are 2 parts of human cloning to be considered- the process of cloning and the product. The process of cloning, refining and discovering it, as aforementioned, bears too much cost in the form of life. And even if there is a breakthrough at the least cost, there would be much repercussions involved in reproductive cloning.
To think of a replica of you may send shivers down your spine. It would for me. Some responses may come saying- no worries, clones won't have the exact personality as you, since personalities are crafted by experience. It may be a social stigma and might take some time getting used to clones. Actually, my shivers come from imagining the life the clone would lead. Discrimination may ensue. That's highly plausible. It'd feel awful to lead a life that is engineered and to know that your existence is not entirely original. You're made to be a copy of someone. A clone is still human after all and the emotional turmoil he'd have to undergo knowing this would be horrid. My GP class watched "The Island" a few months back. I admit it's an extreme scenario for clones but to exist to provide organs for people is cruel.
Alright, I'm getting tired of this argument already. Somehow I get this feeling that Man will never reach the stage of developing human clones. I think i shall write on creativity next... not racial division haha. Been reading this book called "Weird Ideas That Work", I realised that I unknowingly practise some of the 11 and half practices for promoting, managing and sustaining innovation written in it. So it shall be creativity next time.
While flipping through my GP notes related to this widely contentious issue, I saw this quote by John Stuart Mill (philosopher and economist)- "It should be forbidden from imposing its religious beliefs on a dissenting minority, even indirectly." So, I've decided that in taking my stance, I shan't use religion as an explicit reason. Religious reasons on human cloning aren't valid in this world nor are they considered rational to others.
From the animal cloning, test results have shown that in simply begetting dolly, "277 eggs were used to create 29 embryos, which only produced three lambs at birth, only one of which lived" (source: wiki). For only one experiment, 29 embryos had to be used to generate an animal clone. Maybe 29 is too small a number but if we change our mindset and look at these animal embryos as human embryo, perspectives may change. Imagine the millions of embryos, human embryos that we could possibly kill if we were to embark on a course of human cloning experiments. But of course, there are advocates of cloning who refute this argument by saying that if we don't try we won't get anything. The potential benefits of cloning will come mainly in the form of organ replacement. No more debate on organ trade HA. Yet, as a pro-life individual, it's hard to see the benefit in sacrificing millions of embryos (think babies though not quite there), in return for saving some patients. It just doesn't weigh.
But there's a flip side to this issue. What about embryos that are aborted? Do we trash them or do we allow scientists to take this as an opportunity? Perhaps it's better to utilise these resources for discovery in this arena of science than to simply discard these unwanted embryos. But if we allow unwanted embryos to be taken in, this can breed another issue somewhat similar to the organ trade debate- this could spring up sellers of embryos or this may even justify abortion as a contribution to science. The Bioethics Advisory Committee in Singapore adopted a
position on the moral status of embryo that deems it unethical to research on an embryo that had reached its 14th day limit from fertilisation. By then, it would have developed a form of "irreversible individuality". This position is shared by many countries. Knowing that women are mostly unaware of their pregnancies till like weeks after, most aborted embryos won't be taken in after all. So this worrying issue is set aside and I wouldn't want to delve or drag into abortion. Shall save that for another day.
There are 2 parts of human cloning to be considered- the process of cloning and the product. The process of cloning, refining and discovering it, as aforementioned, bears too much cost in the form of life. And even if there is a breakthrough at the least cost, there would be much repercussions involved in reproductive cloning.
To think of a replica of you may send shivers down your spine. It would for me. Some responses may come saying- no worries, clones won't have the exact personality as you, since personalities are crafted by experience. It may be a social stigma and might take some time getting used to clones. Actually, my shivers come from imagining the life the clone would lead. Discrimination may ensue. That's highly plausible. It'd feel awful to lead a life that is engineered and to know that your existence is not entirely original. You're made to be a copy of someone. A clone is still human after all and the emotional turmoil he'd have to undergo knowing this would be horrid. My GP class watched "The Island" a few months back. I admit it's an extreme scenario for clones but to exist to provide organs for people is cruel.
Alright, I'm getting tired of this argument already. Somehow I get this feeling that Man will never reach the stage of developing human clones. I think i shall write on creativity next... not racial division haha. Been reading this book called "Weird Ideas That Work", I realised that I unknowingly practise some of the 11 and half practices for promoting, managing and sustaining innovation written in it. So it shall be creativity next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)