ARW Winter (A)

Is anyone here?

2006-02-27T16:24:00.000+09:00

Hi! I am sad because I cannot meat you in class.
Of course, I finished my all assignments, however, I miss this blog.
Thank you!! I really enjoyed this class!

Hi, Everyone! This is a question from Ayumi.

2006-02-05T12:20:00.000+09:00

May I ask you a question? I'm sorry it is very simple, but I'm confused about it.
Do you think the range of topic in the thesis statement and the range in essay( it means the range of paragraph) should be the same?

Discussion Question 2/3

2006-02-03T22:50:00.000+09:00

Through this article, Smith insistes that what we need for the future about the mass production is not only the automation but also the betterment. Can you imagine other elements? Also, do you think the way to develop in America and Japan are the same?

HW-- Discussion Q.4

2006-02-03T13:32:00.000+09:00

In conclusion, Smith asserted that we need to get back to fundamentals,
but the current economy seems too large to be innovated.
What kind of solution can you saggest?

Discussion Question

2006-02-03T13:23:00.000+09:00

Smith argues that the idea of progress has its positive and negative aspects (P309,L22). What is positive aspect? What is negative aspect?

HW: Discussion Question 4

2006-02-03T11:46:00.000+09:00

I would like to ask about "Ford's paternalistic program (P305, L27)."
Why is it effective to solve the labor problems?
Do you want to work in Ford's?

Discussion Question

2006-02-03T07:56:00.000+09:00

In conclusion, Smith insists it is time to get back to fundamentals. But I think if more and more world progress, they might be able to solve some problems which we are faced.
So, what do you think? Which one is better that we have to progress or not?

Discussion Q

2006-02-03T07:15:00.000+09:00

I think that if people are used like a part of machine in a factory, it is a reasonable function as a worker.
I mean the requirement of working in a factory is depends on the factory's function, as same as the function of office worker.
How do you think about it?

Discussion Question

2006-02-03T04:46:00.000+09:00

In this text, Smith argues computer automation. What do you think about computer automation? Do you think that computer automation influenced Japanese society?

Discussion Question for Friday

2006-02-03T02:37:00.000+09:00

Smith states that the promise of material comfort such as money has not generated the incentive, loyality, and high quality work.
What do you think those workers really wanted?

Discussion Question

2006-02-01T23:58:00.000+09:00

What kind of field do you think automation had already penetrated in at present. Are people receiving its benefits? or is it not needed (=waste)?

HW-- Discussion Q

2006-02-01T14:55:00.000+09:00

According to Ford, democracy blocks progress and just makes waste.
Why did he think so, and do you agree with him?

Discussion and Question

2006-02-01T14:32:00.000+09:00

What is the good point and bad point of Automation ?
What benefit do you take from car or other computer?
How does automation influence on American peopoe and society?

Poem

2006-02-01T14:21:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future...,

There are more than 90 billions of people .
Some are rich and some are very poor
There is farm controled by computer
There is also small farm all of job is done by man's hand

Discussion Question

2006-02-01T14:08:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, he insist that the self-propelled motor vehicle caused "bore responsibility for increased sexual promiscuity, decreaced church attendance, and the breakdown of family and neighborhood solidarity (p.303 l.1-3)" by using some observer's idea.
Do you think so?
Is there any connection between two?

Discussion Question

2006-02-01T13:57:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, what are the problems of automated mass production such as Ford's system?

Discussion Question

2006-02-01T13:31:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, he notice about "Third Industrial Revolution" through computer. Do you thinhk is it possibility to be controlled human by computer in the future?

Discuswsion Question -the latest

2006-02-01T13:17:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, in 19th century Americans belief had shifted from religious quality to science and utilitarianism.
But religious belief seems to be still existing more than 100 years later, today.
What do you think is the reason of the remaining of religious belief today?

HW:Discussion Question3

2006-02-01T11:24:00.000+09:00

In the article by Smith, Ford presume that democracy was inherently wasteful.
Do you think so? If it is true, do you think what relationships among waste, technology and progress are?

Discussion Q

2006-02-01T11:14:00.000+09:00

p.309 l.28
which do you think the most important political liberty, a just society, or human betterment?
(if there are moral principles for progress)

Discussion Question 2/1

2006-02-01T10:34:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, the idea of progress rests on technology.
When technology hadn't came so popular topic to people, how do people think about "progress"?

Discussion Question 2/1

2006-02-01T00:19:00.000+09:00

In this text, the author uses examples of Ford and Model T for explaining technology as progress. What do you think about these examples? I think that the examples are often used as a cross section of mass production.

Discussion Question 2/1

2006-01-31T23:44:00.000+09:00

In the article, Smith notices about the Third Industrial Revolotion through computer or machine. What do you think about the best way to go with these elements in order to make our future? ( What kind of "association" we are required?)

Discussion Question for Wednesday

2006-01-31T16:02:00.000+09:00

As important aspects of the notion of progress, Smith refers to the material and spiritual prosperity.
Which aspect has more significance in our society?
Can you give any example that supports your opinion?

Discussion Question

2006-01-30T23:55:00.000+09:00

What do you think of the possible positive and negative aspects of technology (esp. automation)? Smith (probably...) points out that technology will usurp human's position (=human will obey a robot or something new technology)in the future.

Poem for the future

2006-01-30T23:40:00.000+09:00

I am sorry to be late...

When I look into the future
There are no greens
There are no foods
There are no animals and humans
But there are only aliens

Discussion Question 1/30

2006-01-30T20:32:00.000+09:00

In page 302, it is written that the Christianity stood for love and the science and utility stood for power. Do you think it is possible to exchange those elements? (It means Christianity-power and science and utility- power.) What is your opinion?

Discussion Q

2006-01-30T13:26:00.000+09:00

Do you think that American still has views which is based on history or culture?

Poems for the future

2006-01-30T13:02:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future
There are few people
There are few animals
There are few nature
But there are a lot of rubbish

Discussion Question

2006-01-30T12:58:00.000+09:00

Smith mentions the example of Ford. What is his position toward mass production and the standarization of work?

HW:Question2

2006-01-30T12:12:00.000+09:00

According to Smith,

As citizens and consumers, however, their attitude toward technology often took a different twist. .....working-class Americans seemed to embrace the idea of progress as fervently as members of other classes. (p301)

Why people wish the technology and the progress?

Discussion Q

2006-01-30T11:07:00.000+09:00

In p300, I could not understand "Works and days were offered us, and we took works."
What is days? and what is works?

Discussion Question

2006-01-30T10:39:00.000+09:00

Why author use Jefferson for example?
What is author's opinion?
I can't understand.

Poem for the future

2006-01-30T10:24:00.000+09:00

Today is the future for former people
Did they know the appearance of us?
Did they know the world as this?
Today is the future which is known
By us and Future’s people

Tomorrow is the future for former people and us
Do we know the appearance of future’s people?
Do we know the world of future?
Tomorrow is the future which is known
By Future’s people

poem for future

2006-01-30T10:01:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future
There are many robots for housework
There are convenient system for teleworking
There are symple ways for communication over the borders
But, there isn't need to go out
there isn't much chance to meet somebody directly

Discussion question

2006-01-30T09:50:00.000+09:00

What is Jefferson's saying social end?
Why he thought that industry cause social end?
What is the evidence of his opinion?

Discussion Question 2

2006-01-30T09:36:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, Jefferson took people active needs into account in the argument of progress.
On the other, Coxe emphasized need for further social order.
Which do you think is closer to today's idea of progress?
and why the less closer idea is different?

Poem -visions of the future

2006-01-30T09:24:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future...,
There are huge knowledge tanks.
There are lots of people, waiting in the supply base.
And there is a doctor who inject the content of knowledge tank to the people.
But
There is really few original physical/mental ability for each individual.
There is no people who can live without the injection.

Discussion question for Monday

2006-01-30T04:55:00.000+09:00

Do you think that the advantage of technology is always greater than the disadvantege?
Is there any possibility of technology causing a disaster that leads to extinction of human species?

Ｑｕｅｓｔｉｏｎ

2006-01-30T03:04:00.000+09:00

Where did Jefferson refer to the balance between spiritual and material?
I cannnot find basis of this...

Poem for the future

2006-01-30T03:02:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future
There is the landscape which hardly changes from the present
There is the shop which sells packed lunch (Hokaben)
There is new designed paper money which is printed anyone famous
There isn't any people who wear silver body suit like SF,
but there is people who watch SF and laugh at those image about future

HW-- Discussion Question 2

2006-01-30T01:02:00.000+09:00

What is Jefferson's view of progress,
and how did it affect to American development?

Discussion Question

2006-01-30T00:10:00.000+09:00

Smith says "In the process, we have to be willing to ask, debate, repeat, and hope to resolve"(pg.310 line 23-24) Do you think these kind of things are really effective? I cannot understand exact effectiveness, so please give me possible examples.

Poem for the future

2006-01-29T23:35:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future

There are still many friends
There are still many foods
There are still large lands
There are still innumerable stars

However

The friend are robots and clones
The foods are artificial
The lands are no longer the place human can live
The stars are the new place to live

And human willmake the same mistakes again there.

Poem for the future

2006-01-29T23:07:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future,
There are many high building.
There is ocean around the land.
There are many cars and moving on the sky.
There are many robots.
But there is no nature.

Poem for the Future

2006-01-29T22:12:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future
There are many flowers
There are many trees
But there is no smell in them.

Discussion question

2006-01-29T22:06:00.000+09:00

Why do you think the author returns to jefferson's idea?

Poem for the future

2006-01-29T18:45:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future

There are convenient robots
There are very small computers
There are huge buildings
There are new foods
There are new medicines
There are many products of new technologies in advanced nations

However

There are no convenient robots
There are no very small computers
There are no huge buildings
There are no new foods
There are no new medicines
There are no products of new technologies in developing nations

There are only gaps between rich and poor

Discussion Question

2006-01-29T18:30:00.000+09:00

What do you think the Smith's idea that the auto industry is related to progress?

Poem for the future

2006-01-29T11:38:00.000+09:00

Jan. 29, 2100.

When I look into the land

There is nothing, nothing but a mountain of debris.
There is no building.
There is no animal.
There is no plant.
There is no one to talk with.
There is nothing.
All I can see is debris.

When I look into the sky

Of course, there is no bird to fly.
There is no blue sky.
There is no sun to shine.
All I can see is dark and heavy clouds.

We human beings could not stop World War Three.

Poem for the Future

2006-01-28T13:35:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future,
Around people everythings seem to be bright.
Vehicle run at the sky
Transfer became easier
Even people do not have to worry about oxygen they breathe,
But why human bend their head as if they are not satisfied?

When I look into the future,
Around people everythings seem to be bright.
Robot work what people order
Travel to space became usual
Even people do not have to worry about garbadge they stored,
But why human bend their head as if they are not satisfied?

HW: Poem

2006-01-28T12:32:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future,

There is no plant out of the control of human
There is no animal in nature
High buildings rob children of parks
Air, water and soil are polluted
Seasons and night are lost
Wasts fill the earth
And the inside of earth empties... human cannnot stop anything.

There will be superb birds in blue and high sky
Wild animals may run about free from all fetter
Creatures return into the ocean, and greenth can cover the ground again
There must be the beautiful earth ... as long as there is no human.

When I look into the future in my dream,

There are small cities in the forest
There is only a few people and no one dies from poverty, hunger, wars, murder and other wanton reasons
There are different religions, traditions and cultures, but there is no border between them
They have variety of useful industrial products,
advanced communication system and transport,
but they keep their use to the minimum.

Poem ---possible future

2006-01-27T22:33:00.000+09:00

When I look into the present
There is a rice
There is a potato
There is a soy-bean
There is a banana...
All of crops were created by nature

When I look into the future
There will be a rice
There will be a potato
There will be a soy-bean
There will be a banana...
All of crops will be manipulated by human
How the function of crops will be changrd?
Isn't is peril?
It will be important to talk over between scientists and consumers...

Discussion Question

2006-01-27T22:29:00.000+09:00

Do you think why Smith gives Jefferson and Auto Industry for explaing progress?

Poem for the future

2006-01-27T17:25:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future

There can be highly advanced robots
There can be much more useful transportation systems
There can be everything we can imagine now

However,

There can be desert that covers almost all over the world
There can be struggles over the limited resources
There can be no human beings on the earth

It depends on us...?

HW-- Poem for the Future

2006-01-27T15:24:00.000+09:00

When I look into the future
There are high buildings and floating roads in a city
There are trees and rivers outside of a city contrary
There is coexistance of pro high-technology and anti high-technology
But there can't be harmony without life-extending treatment for nature

Discussion Question

2006-01-27T13:39:00.000+09:00

According to Smith, American idea of progress tends to have religious or frontier-spiritual implication (295). How about Japanese idea of progress? maybe contemporary Japanese idea is not so different from American's though, the base idea, which is concerned with its tradition, can be different.

Discussion Question

2006-01-27T13:34:00.000+09:00

Did you know about Bhopal, Love Canal, and Three Mile Island?

What do you think?

Is there another example of accident?

Discussion

2006-01-27T13:28:00.000+09:00

How technology is useful in our civilization? I think there are many useful thing. Give me example too.

Discussion Question

2006-01-27T13:27:00.000+09:00

This is my discussion question. It is very simple.
According to Smith, what is the Jeffersonian view?

Discussion

2006-01-27T12:49:00.001+09:00

These are my discussion: according to introduction (p 295), why do you think that Charles A. Beard insisted the positive point about technology? Also do you think other Americans thought as well as Beard?

HW: Smith discussion

2006-01-27T11:37:00.000+09:00

"Together they( the idea of progress and the idea of destiny) form our culture's dominant conception of history--much of which is mythological, to be sure, but which nonetheless permeates our perspective both as individuals and as a nation." (P296, L3-6)

In this part of article, I cannot understand what "much of which" mean, and what is relationship between progress&destiny and individuals&nation.

Discussion Question

2006-01-27T06:48:00.000+09:00

My discussion question is based on this sentence.

"When they spoke of progress, as they often did, they consequently gave human betterment (intellectual, moral, spiritual) equal weight with material properity."(Smith pg.297, line11)

Q. Which do you think is regarded as more important element of progress in Japan, human betterment or material prosperity?

Discussion Q. for 1/27

2006-01-27T02:37:00.000+09:00

Can tecnology solve all problems which will occur in the future, or which is now happening in the world?

Smith

2006-01-27T02:36:00.000+09:00

I would like you ask my question.

According to the auther, "the idea of progress and the idea of destiny are closely interwined in America"(p. 296 l. 2)

What is the idea of destiny and how are they( the idea of progress and destiny) connected?
Can you explain this connection with examples?

Essay Bioethics and Religion

2006-01-27T01:57:00.000+09:00

Introduction
As science has progressed, human’s interest began to head into human life and genes, and application of technology, made it possible to create and control human life. Though human may be able to live longer and choose superior gene for their babies, technology relating to human life, such as cloning, causes lots of ethical problems and discussed carefully. This is because handling human life is sanctuary where human cannot enter and only God can do. Therefore, religion which modifies roots of ethics and people’s way of thinking is an essential hint of the reason why cloning is so problematic and there is no good settlement still now. As an example of religion, Christianity is presented which has conceptual idea for human life, comparing with Japanese culture which gives another viewpoint and suggestion for the future of science.

Body
Cloning seems to be thought as wrong by many people and it is disputed intensely in fact. Some of them will list substantial problems as the reason for objection to cloning. According to Silver, cloning baby is thought generally as technically unsafe and unordinary children might be born. Cloning is also believed to interfere with human progress because genetic diversity will be lost. However, these oppositions to substantial problems are denied by Silver who explains them as misperceptions (227-228, 234 242-245). He strongly disagrees with banning of cloning since cloning is a technological step for tissue regeneration and genetic engineering rather than reproduction of children (247). Therefore, people’s concerning is moral and ethical issues and this is more difficult than physical problems. At this point it is effective to thing about religion as a root of bioethics. Ethics and moral is highly depending on religion. Since ancient world, religion decided what life is and how we should deal with it.

In Christian society, religion is mostly introduced into discussion of cloning and bioethics, because it is necessary in thinking about human life and ethics. According to bible, all of things in the world, including our body and soul are created by god, and human’s unnatural manner to violate verities of god’s creation is regarded as charge. Moreover, science has been progressed beneath or together with Christianity because Christianity divides nature and sole and makes it possible to observe nature (Annri 78). Therefore in Christian society, most people including scientists seem to think it wrong to control human life, because it is unnatural and sin in respect of Christianity and horror act which will harm human dignity as a God’s creature.

In comparison with Christian society, typical Japanese culture shows different point of view. It is said that Sinto and Buddhism is typically believed in Japan which do not force each person to covenant with god and allow to believe in whatever the person think god. Although Shinto and Buddhism is the most common religion, more than 75 percent of Japanese people said they do not have any religions (Yomiuri News paper 2005). As this survey shows, Japanese are sometimes described as irreligious or indifferent to religion. As a result of this situation, Japanese people tend not to connect with science, bioethics and religion in discussing about cloning or other kind of biotechnologies. Mostly, the word “dignity of human” or “human rights” are used to explain objection to cloning. This does not mean that Japan is tolerant for human cloning or euthanasia. For instance, Korea and the United Kingdom legalize cloning embryo for the sake of studies and bioresearches. On the other hand, the Japanese law prohibits it though cloning for studies is aimed and under discussion to be legalized (Mainichi shinnbunn December 24, 2005). However, these words are too ambiguous and have weaker meaning to support the reason why cloning is morally wrong than the concept of God and Christianity. Therefore, it becomes difficult to argue bioethics in, and science has possibility to be reckless and advanced rapidly without objection both from inside and outside of scientific society in Japan.

Conclusion

As science sophisticated, biotechnology makes it possible to control human life and genetics more and more. Consequently, bioethical problems will become more difficult than ever, and human may be at a loss and blind to importance of life. In thinking about bioethics, it is biased to consider this issue only from technological and scientific side. In other word, mental side is important, even if it is emotional, as human life especially in the future when technology gets out of hand. Then, religion will be needed to protect moral and ethics from disrupting caused by abuse of science and biotechnology. Additionally, it is painful and confusing but required to withdraw a desire for substance and comfort which has been grown up in people’s mind recently. It is no doubt that science has supplied comfort and richness to human. However, braveness to restraint scientific progress and application of it is necessary, because it will result in the rot of society and moral. Human’s fundamental dignity is in moral or ethics. Religion will give us a suggestion what the important thing is no matter what their religion is.

Work Cited

Annri Morimoto Genndainikatarikakeru kirisutokyou (Christianity), Tokyo: Nihonn kirisutokyoudann syuppannkyoku, 2003

Msn Mainichi Interactive (News paper)

http://www.mainichi-msn.co.jp/science/kagaku/news/20051224ddm003040093000c.html

Silver, Lee M. “Cloning” Remaking Eden How Genetic Engineering and Cloning Will Transform the American Family, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1998 (In The ELP Reader, 2005)

Wennberg, Robert N. “Euthanasia: An Introduction” Terminal Choices: Euthanasia, Suicide, and The Right to Die, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989 (In The ELP Reader, 2005)

Shannon, Thomas A. “Introduction: What is Bioethics? and Thematic Ethical Issues” An Introduction to Bioethics, New York: Paulist Press, 1997 (In The ELP Reader, 2005)

Yoshihiko Komatu, Kenji Doi. Shukyoutoseimeirinnri (Religion and Bioethics) Kyoto: Nakanishiya shuppann, 2005

Smith--- Discussion and Question

2006-01-26T22:33:00.000+09:00

Discussion: What do you think the condition of "the good life" (P295 L27)?
Question: Why Jefferson (3rd president of America) is important for progress in America?
I learned about Jefferson in History of Christianity class, and -teacher (Dr.Anri) said that Jefferson can be called the creater of American spilit-liberty- because he constituted 'Virginia Bill of Rights' which insists the right of an individual freedom.

Essay--- Genetic Engineering

2006-01-26T22:25:00.000+09:00

Introduction
Recently, there can be seen that science has made tremendous progress, and many new technologies has been increasing. Perhaps, these recent technological advances have both benefits and problems, and Genetic Engineering (GE) is one of these technologies.

In this society, although GE has many benefits, it seems that the problems are more exaggerated. To solve this climate, it might be needed that scientists demonstrate several benefits that had already prevailed in human life with assessed corroboration (Spier 2-3). In a similar fashion, the publics should pay attention to this useful technology more positively. Then, it is required that both scientists and the public know each side’s claim and come closer each other. Therefore, this paper will argue the privilege of GE and will find the best way to coexist with science and ethics.

What is GE?
According to Steinbrecher, the meaning of GE is the same as “genetic modification or genetic manipulation”, which means “the reshuffling of genes usually from one species to another”. In current society, GE tends to be seen as “danger” that makes people be scared. On the other hand, Handa shows some fields where GE technology is applied effectively: agriculture and food production, disease and medicine, environment and so forth (189-203). Hence, it can be said that GE technique gives much blessing to all of the people, animals and plants in this world.

GE seen as serious apprehensions
There are some voices of the national fears against GE, and its problems can be seen from two aspects: technology and ethics (Martin and Schinzinger 16). Epstein claims, “Genetic engineering poses serious risks to human health and to the environment. It raises serious ethical questions about the right of human beings to alter life on the planet for the benefit and curiosity of a few”. The main technological problem is that even GE technique is useful there are still fears like that there is a possibility to emerge unexpected affair because GE has not been perfect yet. For example, because of unknown where genes got inserted into the new host (plant or animal) after being recombined, people cannot help depending on genes at all (Steinbrecher). Actually, according to the Department of Food Science and Technology, there are some incidents of latter problem, such as ‘the Brazil nuts affair’ in America.

The other, from ethical side, Bohlin defines usurping God’s realm -“play God”- as “imitating God”, and from this way of thought, bible mentions people’s continuous creating of new creatures, which did not exist before will be invasion of “the only Creator”: God. Further, even some people who do not believe God “are simply expressing awe and wonder at the power that humans can wield over nature” (Bohlin), that is, they cannot get ease on GE yet at this point.

GE as benefit technology
However, GE has been giving us a various privileges, and they are expected more in the future. One of the familiar examples of benefits that people have already gotten is Genetically Modified Organism (GMO). Soybean, corn, potato, and rapeseed can be given as representative examples of GMO. In fact, according to announcement of The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), the acreage for GMO is increasing all over the world, and especially, 90% of American field for soybean have already been GM soybean field until 2004. Moreover, GMO is much cheaper than ordinal crops or foods. Similarly, in medical field people have already taken benefits such as GM medicine as well. In fact, part of GM medicines have already been created and sold (Handa 196). Accordingly, people cannot help depending on GE techniques to lead their lives.

Also, there are many expectations in the future. For instance, using GE technology, people do not need to take much time to make one the best species through crossing again and again, namely, people come to be able to grow crops efficiently (ISAAA). For example, people can splice the anti-freeze gene into tomato or strawberries, and an insect-killing toxin gene into corn, cotton, or rapeseed (Steinbrecher). Then Epstein insists that thanks for GE technique, there is a chance that starving people can be helped by GM foods. Bohlin states that creating crops internally tolerant to disease, particularly to help developing countries better feed their people, is a goal worthy of God’s will. Additionally, GE technology helps eliminate diseases for more foreseeable anticipations, and besides, GE’s much more development will make efficient to mass production of medicines (Handa 196).

Today’s assignment
Now, there are several assignments for both pros and cons to make end up current conflict. One of the subjects which from technological side, Bohlin remarks it is essential to conduct proper and extensive tests for assuring GE safety to prove the certain possibility of GMO. Furthermore, Mailand argues that scholars need good supports by good reasons that are investigated for their beliefs (10-18). Thus, it is necessary to show examined reasons that are more justified to get social and public assent.

Moreover, to solve a problem, Martin and Schinzinger assert people should awake to its ethical dilemma first, and they need to create moral value with sufficient investing (33). Bohlin also mentions, from ethical side, people should consider the extent that genetic manipulation may cross over barriers which God instituted in the creatures. Really, Epstein asserts, “Our morality up to now has been to go ahead without restriction to learn all that we can about nature”. However, it is not optimum ways to just refuse utterly this hopeful technique. If decline GM technique, people deny also its benefits now they are receiving at the same time.

Finally, the most serious problem, which needs quick solution, is the way of using. It means that the user’s will and measures affect the public. Therefore, even GE is beneficial thing, if pros use it in wrong way, the good aspects tend to be invisible and the public will have bad imagine. Bohlin says, GE is not responsible for itself, but people should be ruled their option. In short, pros should restrict their desires and consider the right direction of GE.

Besides, how to inform is also important. Actually, Birk and Birk point out that people tend to do “slanting” what they want to insist using emphasis, selection, and so forth (102-103). For example, the opposition side of GE selects only negative aspects like uncertainty of safety and emphasizes it with slanting as ‘serious risky technology’. In this complicated information society, all information has the potential to be used for good or evil. Therefore, the media should not be one-sided and give sufficient appropriate information to people. Additionally, scientists must show evidences of GE justice, which based on adequate experiments through the media to get the publics confidence (Meiland 15-17). Then, people should pay attention to and be critical against all news about science. Actually, there are pointed out several various fears against GE problems, but there is also no evidence that GE will make harm. In addition, there is not only GE technology that has apprehensions but other scientific technology like agrichemicals has much fear.

Conclusion
Though there are still several concerns about GE technique and issues, people should recognize and accept its blessing. In a similar fashion, pros should keep moral and confine desires to some extent, that is, scientists should not abuse their technique too much to pursue their curiosity. Now, it might be the most important thing that people set the common limitation in scientific field to solve GM confliction. Bohlin urges responsibility is really necessary to ensure this “powerful technology”: GE, and says, “We simply cannot afford to be ignorant of genetic issues and technologies and expect to contribute to the necessary discussion that lies ahead”.

Works Cited
Birk, Genevieve, and Birk, Newman. “Selection, Slanting, and Charged Language”. Speaking of Words: A Language Reader (Second Edition). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 1982. (In The ELP Reader, 2004. 99-110)

Bohlin, Ray. “Genetic Engineering”. Probe Ministries: 32 paras. 5 Aug. 2003.

Druker, Steven M. “Why concerns about health risks of Genetically Engineered Food are scientifically justified”. Alliance for Bio-integrity: 25 paras. 31 Mar. 2004.

Epstein, Ron. “Ethical Danger of Genetic Engineering” Synthesis/ Regeneration: A Magazine of Green Social Thought, Vol. 20: 20 paras. Fall, 1999.

Handa, Hiroshi. Principle and Application of Genetic Engineering. Japan: Shokodo, 2001

Martin, Mike W, and Schinzinger, Roland. Ethics in Engineering Fourth Edition. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2005.

Meiland, Jack W. College Thinking: How to Get the Best Out of College. New York: New American Library. 1981. (In The ELP Reader, 2005. 1-25)

Spier, Raymond E. Science and Technology Ethics. London and New York: Routledge, 2002.

Steinbrecher, Ricarda. “What is Genetic Engineering?”. Synthesis/ Regeneration: A Magazine of Green Social Thought, Vol. 18: 30 paras. Winter 1999

The Department of Food Science and Technology. Homepage.

The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). Homepage. < http://www.isaaa.org/>

HW--Discussion Topic, Smith

2006-01-26T22:00:00.000+09:00

"How can the idea of progress be defined from the view of American culture?"

If it's not quite good, I'd like to add
"Why is it considered as quasi-religious character?"

2006-01-26T09:43:00.000+09:00

Title[ Cloning and Children:ethically problems and the possibility of entire clone]

Introduction
Today, it will become real that human makes the clone of animals even humans. Cloning technology is capable of various uses, especially in the field of medicine, the study to make drugs in the body of animal clones has begun. This essay will deliberate that the possibility and meaning of human cloning, and whether human cloning should be accepted or not.

Definition
In this essay, "cloning" is including genetic engineering, and this essay will particularly deal with cloning of human beings. Since Dolly was cloned, people succeeded in cloning of other kinds of animals. Some people try to revive extinct species like mammoth. Others earn huge moneys by using cloning techniques for example they provide replacement of dead pet. Then, the research and development to set new genes which make useful peculiarities for people in fat stocks is also made progress. But then again, antipathy against genetic technology and cloning are deep-rooted, especially against human cloning.

Cloning strongly related with genetic engineering. Cloning is not genetic engineering, however, if cloning is not realized, also genetic engineering will not be realized [Silver (157)]. Dr. Nagashima, who is a professor of Biomedical educational researching Center of Osaka University, interprets Silver's idea about cloning, "Cloning is not only a transplant of nucleus. The most important purpose of cloning is not making a copy of one individual, it is making genetically modified organisms" [cited Silver]. In the human cloning, it means that someone produce genetic manipulated baby someday not so far.

Roughly speaking, cloning is divided into partly cloning and entire cloning, and clone is made in each way for different purpose. The most important purpose of cloning technologies is medical cure. And, there is another reason why genetic engineering strongly related with cloning. Silver represented that people who cannot make their own babies because of some circumstance, they wish to make baby by cloning. Therefore, people will maybe have to consider about the possibility of entire.

Cloning for Medical Cure of Children
Cloning technology is very useful for organ transplantation because clone is a faultless donor of one person. In the natural world, nobody cannot have the same gene except identical twin, triplet…even if their parents. Only 1/4 of normal sisters or brothers can be a donor who does not be attacked by the patient's own immune system. People who can be a donor are nothing but 1/20,000 in completely strangers. In Japan, 30% of population insists that they do not want to be donor after they are dead. 70% do not reject donate their organs, but only 5% people show their mind clearly. In addition, in Japan, it is too difficult to be judged brain death, and it is too late to transplant when the doctor get the organ for transplantation. Kidney transplantation is one of the most favorite in Japan, there are 12000 patients who want, but donated kidneys from dead people are 173 a year [Takii 176,185]. To make up the deficit, patients go abroad and wait for appearing the donor.

If the patients are children, organ transplantation become more difficult because the patients are younger, their conditions worsen faster. They do not have time for waiting organ donation, they were died before they can receive the organ transplantation. Other serious problem is that small body of children cannot bear the responsibility of operations and strong effect of drugs. Cloned organs can solve these problems. First, they do not have to wait donor. And it is good for donor and their family, because living organ donations have the danger of donor's life and many families of donor are sore at heart over cutting their body. Moreover, they do not have to worry about the failure of transplantation by the rejections.

　　 For the organ transplantation, partly cloning works enough. However, partly cloning may be difficult than entire cloning for the present. Embryonic stem cell is still fresh in minds of people all over the world. The studies about cloning human's ES cells of professor Hwang, who is scientist of Korea, is not fact [CNN.co.jp]. When human makes clone of organs, they need to use ES cells because one organs usually made from variety kinds of cells except special simple organs like cornea.

Dream of Parents
Silver guesses that there are many people who wish to make clones, and quite a few doctors help them. Today, if sterile couples want a baby, they will try ICSI. Surely, cloning will be requested stronger than ICSI [Silver2, 221]. If they make children by cloning, a drop in the birth rate will stop. One of the reasons is people who cannot make children like gay couple or sterile couple will be able to have children. In America, many orphans are adopted by them, but there are many people want to have children yet. If they can have their own child, it is no wonder that they are pleased. Frank Kameny, the leader of the gay movement in the United States declared, "Keep the government off our bodies!" "Our DNA belongs only to us." "Let the cloning begin," he intoned. And a lesbian columnist, Ann Northrop, has said that "in a time when we are afraid that discovery of a genetic basis [for homosexuality] would lead to people aborting us, cloning would be a way of surviving"[Kameny, Northrop cited in Murphy, 142]. And if they can be mother without husband, single women think that they want to have child. The reason why career women do not marriage and do not have children is that the pregnancy becomes fetter for their success. But if they can get pregnant when they want, and if they do not have to marry just to have children.

If cloning pregnancy will be real, another technique -genetic engineering will be real, too. For the first reason, technology of genetic engineering is developed by study of cloning. 5 purposes of animal cloning which National Bioethics Advisory Committee (NBAC) presented in 1997 as follows, making identical animals for study, breeding domestic animals which have good quality in short term, efficient breeding of transgenic animals, improvement of domestic animals by genetic targeting, fundamental study of specialization of cells. Genetic engineering is used in 2 of these 5 purposes. Secondly, when single woman make child by cloning herself, some women do not need inferior gene from man. She wish to keep good gene which her own [Eric & Richard Posner, cited in Nussbaum & Sunstein]. If they make clone to child have better gene, they will hope to give good gene, and remove bad gene which original person have by genetic engineering. By using genetic engineering, they can make their clone better than themselves because clones are same with themselves, and they knew improvement points of them. People can choose oosperm which have good genes, and baby is born with unnatural immunity against illness like AIDS.

On the other hand, baby who has hereditary disease do not be born. It is good for world people doubly or triply. First, there is no native and negative difference. At least, they are equal at the start line. In the next, every kind of loads will be reduced because of this. For example, families support the disabled person from the womb to the tomb. And government and citizens support them, too. As you know, if these responsibilities will be lighter, it is better. Third, the world can keep zero population growth. Researchers predict that global population will grow up 6,800,000,000 in 2010, and it is big issues for us. In many cases, population of developing country is increasing because people do not know or cannot use the birth control. In addition, they try to have many children, for the reason they often lose their children by disease. In developing country, if the healthy children must be born by genetic engineering, child death rate will go down and because it will positive correlated with birth rate, it will also go down. And in advanced nation, children will be born by cloning, and birth rate will increase.

And if they can use the cloning to revive their dead children, it is not impossible. They can obtain the child who has same eye's color, hair and so on. The parents lost their children are deeply sad and they will not be able to forget that forever, though they have new children. Some of them break their hearts especially the cause of their children's death was their mistakes like slight carelessness. If they can go back to start, it means that they raise the child who is same as their lost child again, it may console them more than they make sister or brother of dead child as substitute. Dead child can revive as new life. Of course, the second child is identical human with the first child except gene. Nevertheless, there must be people who wish to make their dead children's clone. Also it may help the parents, because they often divorce if they have only one child than they make new children and rebound from despair.

Fears against Cloning
Non the less, half percent of people apprehensive of cloning. Silver represents they believe that the cloning is to make copy not only gene but also characters of one person as did in the fictions, but it is not to be real [Silver2, 228-232]. However, former people cannot project that human makes clone really. Reasonably people think that the characteristic's copy will be realized some day.

Genetic engineering has dangerous problems. The biggest one is disappointment. If baby will be born with hereditary disease, it will become harder his parents to accept baby. Actually, a mother who get a babies by surrogate mother cannot be interested in her sun, because though she want him to have green eyes and she choose green eye woman as her surrogate mother, he does not have. But mother can cherish second children, daughter, despite she obtain her just as her sun, because she was born with green eyes. The child not to be as hoped is proper at present but it will be difficult for a child contrary to the hope of the future, the parents where the design child [Silver] spread to be very accepted.

　　 Human can manipulate the DNA, but it will be never perfect. There are unlimited possibilities in the field of genetic engineering, and the length of improving technology is also unlimited. People cannot completely control nuclear energy but they are going on using it, as a result, many people were atom- bombed. The earth was contaminated by leak of radioactivity from power plant and radioactive waste. Genetic engineering is same with nuclear energy. People can set one animal's gene in another's DNA, however removing techniques are not ensured yet. If people set strange gene in human and hundreds years later, those genes are widely inherited among people. They notice that those genes have fatal bad effects to the human specie but they cannot remove that, it is worse than radioactive contamination.

The problem is not only the technology, Kass refer to that, and self-cloning is simply an extension of such rootless and narcissistic self-re-creation [Kass cited in Murphy, 16]. In other words, the mean of cloning will be "boycott of others" for especially single mother or father who cannot make steady. They try less and less to make concern with others. Moreover, there is no guarantee that harm will not come to cloned children. Some people mention that clone is identical twin just they are born later, and each of natural twins is individual person. It is nonsense that one of twins harmed as he is a copy of another one. It is true in the case of natural twins. They must be born at the same time, and they do not tell which is copy of another. But clone is undoubtedly copy of original. There are definite differences between natural identical twins and clone. If they do not rebel against their own as cloned human, people cannot refresh telomere which decide the life time of each cells now. Every clone's lifetime is shorter than original sells. No one have the rights that they force short life on cloned children.

Conclusion
Cloning, especially human entire cloning and genetic engineering should not be used until people can control perfectly. If we accept the embryo cloning, it should be vigilant not to abuse carefully by the human all over the world. When people consider this problem deeply, they notice that if they can, they should not make human clone easily.

Work Cited
Murphy, Timothy F. "Our children, our selves: The meaning of cloning for gay people." [in　Ｆresh of My Fresh-the ethics of cloning humans]
NBAC "The Science and The Application of Cloning" [Clones and Clones] ed. Martha C.　Nussbaum & Cass R. Sunstein.　Norton & Company, Inc.,1998.
Posner, Eric A. & Richard A. "The Demand of Human Cloning" [Clones and Clones] ed. Martha　C. Nussbaum & Cass R. Sunstein.　Norton & Company, Inc.,1998.
Silver, Lee. M. Remaking Eden. NY, Harper Collins Publishers, Inc. 1998.
Silver 2, Lee. M. "Cloning." Remaking Eden. NY, Harper Collins Publishers, Inc. 1998. [in ELP　Reader,2005. 217-251]
Takii Hiroomi. Human Body Business. Tokyo, Iwanami syoten, 2005.
Korean clone panel's report
Wikipedia

Bioethic Essay

2006-01-25T20:07:00.000+09:00

"Legalization of Euthanasia in Japan:
Each Person should have Right and Responsibility for Death"

At the present day, Japan is in aging society, and the number of patients of advanced age is increasing. Additionally, there have been many accompany situation for any person to face with brain death, vegetable person, and painful and hopeless ill (Shannon 269). However, there is no rule to decide and judge about executing euthanasia, therefore none can act it even if it is a situation that euthanasia should be operate. Accordingly, euthanasia should be legalized with a reasonable system, because the view for euthanasia is different among each person, and it should depend on each person.

First of all, there are problems which occur without law to allow anyone to act euthanasia. For example, in Japan if a doctor acts euthanasia, he or she would be indicted for murder. However, if another doctor acts euthanasia which is completely same as former doctor, the judgment of two doctors would be different. It is because all the patients’ family, circumstances, and participants are different. It is too hard for doctors to be judged the action of euthanasia which the doctor operates as one of procedure for the patient, even if only doctors can be and must be responsible for patients’ life in medical situation as Rachels describe when letting patient die, the doctor is in special moral position that is different with all other people (153). This conflict occurs because there is no clear law for guideline between medical procedure and “killing.” In many cases, as a doctor says that it depends on discretion of each doctor, the view whether it is just procedure or not is changeable with the doctor’s mind, and also the view whether it is murder or not is arbitrary with the each family and jurist (Kodama and Yamaguchi).
In addition, in many classes of school as ICU, people have debated about euthanasia, because it is undoubtedly one of the most difficult issues to decide whether it is good or bad, and its view is quite different between all people with difference for moral thinking. Euthanasia is really important subject, therefore only continuing to thinking and discussing must be finished and determine the way to treat it. That is why Japanese society needs clear law and rule for acting euthanasia.

Second, in contemporary society, individual personality is almost primary important for thinking about people, hence, both right and responsibility for death should also be considered deeply. For right, as many people says, all people have to have right for living happily same as all other rights. Patients can choose about own life, as Ackerman wrote, when torment is destiny, euthanasia is legitimate. Consequently, all patients are able to have right for death with the range that is not suicide.
Also, it introduces patients to have responsibility for death. If patients can have a right, they should be responsible for decision that they determines, because it relates with their own lives which should be most important. All people want to live good life, and who makes the lives good are people themselves (Foot 18).

With these two reasons that there needs legalization of euthanasia, here is a suggestion to authorize. Fundamental policy of the way is whether the doctor operates or does not operate euthanasia should be decided by the patient. As first reason for this policy, there are uncountable numbers of conflicts with moral among all people who participate the operation of euthanasia for each patient, and the problem is always discussed by people that are not the patient who would or would not be practically acted euthanasia. Naturally, the issue should be judged by law if it is obvious murder even if anyone sees, however many issues that are discussed seriously may be extremely subtle. Besides, the point of view for subtle issues as euthanasia is different among all people in any parts. Therefore, determination for operation of euthanasia should depend on the patient.
A method is that when a person becomes twenty years old, he or she must decide one’s voice, and it is saved until the person will die. The reason why decision of twenty yeas old is, because in Japan a person became seen as an adult, accordingly, adult people must protect themselves, and must and can decide about themselves while society tend to shape the law with moral mind activity (Wennberg 261). This determination is not just answer the question “Do you want to be operated euthanasia?” There must be many questionnaires about details as the question “Do you want to put the life prolonging device off when you became brain death and you have no hope to revival?” This delicate question must not confuse any people to judge, and it makes people reconsider about their own lives, and it should be changeable for the time if they change the answer. However, it makes a confusion about younger people than twenty. To solve it, children’s voice should be decided by parents because they are too young and persons who most know and consider about the child must be the parents.

With these reasons and suggestion, euthanasia should be legalized. All people are afraid about death, and are confused when they think about death situation. Additionally, Japanese tend to ignore the troublesome issues, whereas if none does not consider about own life and death, there will be too many trouble to solve. People must decide themselves with reasonable way and reconsider about themselves deeply.

Works Cited
Ackerman, Felicia Nimue. “Ethics and Euthanasia” The New York Times.
13 Mar 2005. 19 Jan 2005.
res=9E01E5D7143CF930A25750C0A9639C8B63>
Foot, Philippa. “Euthanasia”. Ethical Issue relationg to Life and Death.
Ed.Ladd John. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.
Kadoma Jumpei, and yamaguti yosiko. Yomiuri online. 21 May. 2005. 20 Dec, 2005

Rachels, James. “Euthanasia, Killing, and the Right to Die”.
Ethical Issues Relating to Life and Death. Ed, Ladd, John. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1979.
Shannon, Thomas A. An Introduction to Bioethics Third Edition. New York:
Paulist Press, 1997. (In The ELP Reader, 2005. 267-289.)
Wennberg, Robert N. Terminal Choices: Euthanasia, Suicide, and The Right to Die.
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989.
(In The ELP Reader, 2005. 253-265.)

Essay "The misunderstandings about cloning"

2006-01-25T14:08:00.000+09:00

There have been a great number of movies, novels, magazines about cloning. Most of them tend to tell people how dangerous cloning is. Therefore, many people have negative images and biases about cloning. Of course, cloning has some disadvantages and it may be dangerous so that people should think of it carefully and make their positions on cloning. However, people have a lot of misunderstandings about cloning so that they may make their positions by wrong analysis of cloning. Therefore, this essay will argue what misunderstandings are and that people should throw away biases of it.

Etymologically, clone is derived from the Greek word klon that means twig, and cloning can be broadly defined as asexual reproduction, transplantation of a nucleus from a cell into an ovum, and simply making a genetic copy (Paul448), and most plants can easily be cloned through the use of cuttings or bulbs (Silver223-224). Uemura insists that the clones have the four features (21). The first feature is that the character and the body of the clone may be quite different from those of original person because of the environment around them and the education from parents. Secondly, the clone does not have the memory of original person, because the memory acquired not depending on his gene. Thirdly, it takes a few decades to bear the clone of adult. Fourthly, the clones are not created by machine, namely, they are born by surrogate mother.

There are three main misunderstandings about cloning. The first misunderstanding is that people can revive the dead people by using cloning technology. The cloning of mammals by simple nuclear transfer is biologically impossible (silver223-224). Of course, the clone is considerably different from the original person even if the clone who is born by using complete nuclear transplantation can have the same DNA as the original person. The most important difference between original person and the clone is the difference of consciousness. The clone does not have the memory, character, or thought of original person, because these are is acquired things. SF movies often describe the clones as people who have some memory, character, or thought, but they are not realistic. The technology which can make the clones have the memory of original people is much higher than cloning technology. Therefore, even if people intend to revive Einstein and clone him, the clone will not be him and furthermore, the clone may not be genius, because the environment, the era, and surrounding people are quite different. Secondly, there is misunderstanding that human beings are completely born and composed according to information of DNA. People often misunderstand that DNA information decides their abilities and talents. But the thought connects with eugenics, because Shipman argues that eugenic scientists believe that both physical and character traits are heritable (184). Of course, most people know that the abilities and talents are from both nature and nurture. DNA information does not decide all of human life. The most of personal character and abilities are formed by his environment after he is born. For example, the language is not inheritable and it depends on each environment. Therefore, Uemura insists that DNA is just possibility of human (32-34). Finally, there is misunderstanding that human beings can make other human. People can not create other people such as God. Namely, the clones are born only by surrogate mother, not by the machine. Therefore, people can not clone many people at the same time. Moreover, if we intend to create our own clone, it takes many years to create, because there is no technology to make people grow up earlier. So if someone intends to create the clone who is 20 years old, it takes 20 years to create. The human clones are born by mother and grow up as same as human beings. Therefore, the human clones are not things, but human.

The clones are not as similar to the original people as identical twins, because there are three reasons. The first reason is that identical twins and triplets start off with identical chromosomal and mitochondrial genetics (Paul449). However, the clones are different from the original people in chromosomal and mitochondrial genetics if they are born by surrogate mothers. The second reason is that they grow up in the same condition of womb, their mother’s body, and her hormone. Finally, after they are born, they are educated by the same family and grow up in the same society and the same era. Therefore, Paul argues that identical twins and triplets are the “gold standard” for genetic identity of mammals (449). Moreover, it is the sole cloning technique to have been attempted experimentally with human embryos (Hanna149).

Some people indicate the harms of cloning technology, but it can be solved. Brock argues that there are two individual harms of cloning. Firstly, human cloning would produce psychological distress and harm in the later twin. Secondly, human cloning procedures would carry unacceptable risks to the clone (135-137). However, psychological distress and harm are occurred not by their birth but by the discrimination to the clones, and the development of technology reduces unacceptable risks to the clone. And Brock also insists that there are five social harms of cloning. Human cloning would lessen the worth of individuals and diminish respect for human life. Secondly, human cloning would divert resources from other more important social and medical needs. Thirdly, human cloning might be used by commercial interests for financial gain. Fourthly, human cloning might be used by governments or other groups for immoral and exploitative purposes. Fifthly, human cloning used on a very widespread basis would have disastrous effect on the human gene pool by reducing genetic diversity and our capacity to adapt to new conditions (137-138). However, the first harm is misunderstanding, because the clone is quite different from original person and he is unique, therefore, human cloning would not lessen the worth of individuals and diminish respect for human life. The second and fifth harms can be easily solved by government’s policy. The third and fourth harms would be prohibited by law. These harms can be solved, but they may be realized so that people must watch and think cloning problems.

In conclusion, there are misunderstandings that people can revive the dead people by using cloning technology and human beings are completely born and composed according to information of DNA, and human beings can create other human. Therefore, we must reconsider what cloning is. If we understand cloning correctly, we can understand that the fear for the clone of Hitler and anxiety about mass production of soldiers are nonsense. And doing away with prejudices of cloning, people should guard the harms of cloning.

Work Cited
Brock, Dan W “Cloning, Ethics” (In “Encyclopedia of ethical, legal, and policy issues in biotechnology volume 1”. New York. 2000. 129-138)
Hanna, Kathi E “Cloning, overview of human cloning” (In “Encyclopedia of ethical, legal, and policy issues in biotechnology volume 1”. New York. 2000)
Paul Lauritzen and Nathaniel Stewart “Cloning” (In “Encyclopedia of bioethics 3rd edition” New York.2004. 447-467)
Shipman Pat “Prologue/ Sweeping Toward a Racial Abyss” New York 1994 (In The ELP Reader, 2005. 179-213)
Silver, Lee M. “Remaking Eden”. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.1998. (In The ELP Reader, 2002. 213-247)
Uemura Yoshiro “Clone Ningen no Rinri” Japan. 2003

Image of future

2006-01-25T13:56:00.000+09:00

This is my image of future. My image is negative. Today, people destroy nature and biosphere, and global warming is proceeding. As a result, the climates will be changed greatly, and forests will disappear. They will cause the shortages of food, water, and energy.

Painting/Gregory　Amenoff

Essay -“Bioethics Actors: Their Qualities and Roles”

2006-01-25T12:39:00.000+09:00

Introduction
People have made effort to develop their art in order to obtain more comfortable life. Particularly, since the industrial revolution, people life style has changed so dramatically toward convenient life. In the phase of developing technology, people inquiring mind has played a critical role. Inquiring mind can be regarded as infinite nature, so it might be possible to search further development. However, leaving curiosity free to be pursued can be rather harmful for human development, especially in the field of biotechnology. Hence, to avoid the harmful outcomes, it is required to have controller of technology development. The concept of bioethics can be one of expectative controller.

The characteristic of bioethics is its multi-disciplinarity. Bioethics deals with technology, medicine and biology for example (Shannon 270), yet not only them, but social organization such as companies, government and individual seems to be also concerned with bioethics. In short, numerous institutions must have connection in some way with bioethics. However, there are some problems of using the idea of bioethics. Because of its multi-disciplinarity, it may be hard to make each institute’s role on bioethics obvious. And consequently that issue prevents bioethics from its effective working. Therefore, it is essential for effective function of bioethics to analyze and to reconsider each organization’s role and contribution to bioethics. This essay will argue how each organization contribute to a functional working of bioethics, by analyzing qualities of each organization at first, and problems that are concerned with that qualities in the second.

Qualities of the Actors
Before discussing the problem, it is required to demonstrate each organization’s qualities. Gorovitz mentions that point, that bioethics is a “critical examination of the moral dimensions of decision- making” in the field which has to do with human life and science (cited in Shannon 272). At first, the contributors of biotechnology and bioethics can be divided into several groups. Smith’s explanation of social dimension can be a hint: “Science finds- industry applies- man conforms” (295). With applying that explanation, the contributors are classified into (1) technology providers, (2) technology users, (3) technology receivers, and (4) actual controllers of bioethics.

Technology Providers
Firstly, scholars are a very important organization as a provider. Scholars’ general role is to discover new facts or ideas through investigation. To carry out their role sufficiently, curiosity should be an important quality. According to Morgan, scholars should their curiosity, and pursuing the curiosity until reaching a satisfaction is the main purpose of them (29-32). Meiland also refers that point. Meiland at first demonstrates the example of Darwin’s investigation of evolution and his declaration of the evolutional theory, which were seriously challengeable at that time, and finally states that college and scholar work is so thorough that their activity can be subversive activity for the society (13). Thus, in the ideal way, scholars’ curiosity should be a principal quality rather than consequences of research.

There is another provider, engineers as a significant joint. Engineers’ role is to develop scholars’ ideas, and produce or complete actual technology. For engineers, contrary to scholars, consequences of their producing are an important quality. Fokkema et al. suggests a role of engineer, that there is “threefold challenge” which engineers have to meet. One is suggesting new approaches by carrying out R&D (research and development). Second is making partnership with other disciplines by keeping engineers’ quality. The last is “bridging moralism and strategic pragmatism” (219-228). Akay also gives the similar suggestion, that preventing “future catastrophes” is a traditional responsibility of engineers. On the other, having perspective not only of technical experts, but also social, financial and political factors -people, hospitals, companies, and governments for example- is also required now (145-150). Hence, because of their quality of being an agency, engineer should consider numerous institutions’ circumstances.

Technology Users
The greatest technology users are companies, and companies are also most effective influence factor. There are mainly two roles, one is meeting people demand, regardless the demand has already been claimed or yet potential. So companies are very sensitive to public needs, and companies technology application may cause public next demands. Another role is supporting engineers’ activities financially in order to lead profitable technology application. According to Sharpe, companies seek broader market share in numerous fields, and they particularly invest in beneficial investigation. In fact, 70 percent of fund for drug research is from companies (23-27). In short, companies have almost actual and strong influence both on people and engineers.
Technology users are not only companies. Scholars and engineers are also main users. They use the existent technology to apply further research. As Meiland mentions, the role of scholars, and maybe engineers also, is questioning of everything, which have a straight relation with “real” life (13-14). In other words, existent technology can be helpful for its providers’ further research. Roughly speaking, people are also technology users, but it seems relatively indirect, because they do not necessarily have sufficient expertise.

Technology Receivers
The receiver of technology can be all organization of course, but especially, the level of impact may be the highest for public. There are two characteristics of public. First, most of them are lay, in other words, they do not have special and technical information unless they are interested in. The reason for being lay is that, according to Gell-Mann, people have divided and assigned numerous disciplines to certain specialties (325). That specialization has been effective for extension of each study as much as possible. Instead, public knowledge had to be broad but shallow. Second characteristic is that their request for more comfortable life can be infinite. That demand has power toward companies and government’s decision-making process. Therefore, people commit inventing for comfortable life to certain institutions, and they anticipate profits that come from new technology. On the other hand, it may be needed to mention that people sometimes refuse certain technologies. It is an interesting quality.

Actual Controllers
There are mainly two organizations as actual controllers of profitable technology development by bioethics. One is a government. Its role is to watch the social movement, especially the use of technology, and to make laws as legal norms of behaviour in order to prevent technologies from abuse. For example, in2000, Japanese government enacted the Law of Restricting Human Cloning Technologies. According to the law, human cloning is prohibited, except for purpose of researching with government permission. And another example is a instituting the Council of Scientific Technology and Research. One of the council’s roles is evaluating the working of bioethics.
Religion or ethics is another actual controller. Religion suggests how human should be. On the one hand government controls its nation behaviour, on the other the control power of religion is relatively narrow, for certain groups or individuals. Barbour points out that religious symbol, such as God, is in the realm of individual (14). Shannon admits, critically though, the power of ethics in terms of “the great ‘nay-sayer’” (270).

Problems
As it is mentioned in the former part, the covered area of bioethics is “necessarily broad” (270). Yet, on the other hand, interpretations of bioethics of each institution may be different, and it seems that confusing of each view degrade the working of bioethics.

Scholars’Dilemma
For scholar, curiosity should be respected as much. Morgan specializes the quality of college or investigate institutions, and refers that where the society’s resentment can be challenged is investigate institutions as a “sanctuary” (29,30). The question is that if Morgan’s idea is applied, it may means bioethics do not have to be exactly covered to scholars, or rather, bioethics might be defied by investigate institutions. In addition, if bioethics is not applied for them, the responsibility to dedicate to bioethics would be committed to other organizations. Furthermore, at least in today’s world, law can restrict the scholars’ behaviour to some extent, there is a kind of contradiction. Theoretically, if investigate institutions challenges social pressure against pursuing curiosity, the institutions should also defy the law. Of course this theory is not realistic, but it is required to reconsider how scholar manage both curiosity and submission to bioethics.

Engineers’Confusion
Engineers can have a confusion of the word of “consequences”. Because of the confusion, engineer may not be able to contribute bioethics sufficiently. There are two types of consequences for engineer. One is an impact for society. The products by engineers can cause harmful outcomes, as well as profitable outcomes. According to IAP (the Interacademy Panel) Statement on Biosecurity, scientists have to recognize the possibly harmful consequences, and have to try to refuse those consequences (Article 1). The other is companies’ application of engineers’ technology. It is true that the more companies use engineers’ technology, the better engineers’ financial circumstances of researching are going to be. What is problematic is that the word “consequence” tends to be interpreted as the latter too much. This situation has a risk of losing engineers’ dignity toward companies. Indeed, company has a strong influence to engineers’ decision. In addition, since companies respect its profit primarily, they may cause world unfairness, and engineers might have to involve with that. According to Bruce, for example genetically modified crops research may not able to solve poverty problems in developing countries, because that technology is for western farmers’ utilitarianism. In short the direction of researching relies on the temporal values they are driven by (21). Therefore, it is essential for keeping engineers’ dignity to consider the former type of “consequences” as well.

Companies and Biased Ethicists
It is true that submitting to ethical principle can be beneficial for companies, so it seems that bioethics can work sufficiently for them. In addition, currently, many companies have had their ethicists. It seems that companies attempt to obey bioethical rule. However, there are some issues.
Firstly, having ethicist may be primarily for extending company image, not for true submission to bioethics. Companies seem to obtain only benefit of having ethicist. According to Sharpe, thanks of having ethicist, companies can do not only enhancing their public image and financial standing, but also deflecting criticism, and obtaining credibility (23-27). Therefore, without ethicists’ power to compel companies to obey bioethics, an effective function of bioethics could not be expected.
The second problem is ethicists’ ambiguous criterion of judgment. Since the covered area of bioethics is broad, it is required for ethicist to have knowledge of numerous disciplines. Still the reality is different from the ideal. Nevertheless the needs of ethicist is increasing, it is still hard to find person who has such numerous disciplines knowledge. The report of the Council of Scientific Technology and Research points out the problem of ethicists, that one judgment of ethicist committee sometimes differ from that of the other committees (2). Thus, making norms of ethicists is urgently needed.

Public Preconceptions and Unconsciousness
Because of discipline specialization, it has been easy for people to be lay. However, these phenomena may cause a risk for people to be controlled by some biased information. For example, as Silver points out, the public image of “cloning” is different from its scientific meaning, because various science fiction books or movies made the public image, but people confuse the two different meanings (228-230). To be independent and conscious civilians, having adequate knowledge to care about their own life is required. The report of United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) also mentions that point that public awareness, particularly in developing countries, about biotechnology is not sufficient to have a power to lead biotechnology development (12). Hence, an effective working of bioethics also needs public consciousness.

Government Attitude
For developing or sub-developed countries, success of technology development is a great opportunity to come up with developed countries. But in such countries especially, the power of ethical qualities tends to be surpassed by the development policy. The current issue is the fiction of cell technology of one processor in South Korea. According to The Nikkei Newspaper, the Korean government had dedicated about 65 billion and 800 million won to the professor for 8 years, with a great hope of establishment of state of science (January 11, 2006 page9). At that time most developed country was careful about this research because of its ethical risk, Korean government regarded that it was a big chance. Consequently the national pressure caused serious outcome. It is important for government as controller not to drive temporary movement.

For Effective Function of Bioethics
Almost all of the problems may have to do with lack of consciousness to contribute to bioethics. For effective working of bioethics, it is needed at first to notice why bioethics is important. As it is mentioned, bioethics role is to avoid technology abuse, and to lead technology to equally profitable development. In addition, clarifying each institutions way of contributing to bioethics can be important method. Scholars and engineers must take consequences of their production into account. Companies and government must consider their policy of making products. And people must acquire proper knowledge and must be critical thinkers. Finally, all institutions must assemble their contributions. Gell-Mann mentions that point, that after specialization, there is also need for integration for sustainable world (325). An effective function of bioethics can be found in multi-discipline but integrated field.

Works Cited
Akay, A. “The renaissance engineers in a post-9/11 world”, European Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), Taylor and Francis Ltd. June 2003, 145-150.

Barbour, Ian G. “Science and Religion Today” Science and Religion, Ed. Ian G. Barbour, New York, Evanston, London: Harper & Row, 1968, 3-29.

Bruce, Donald, “Making the world better?” New Scientists, 186(2503), London: June, 2005, 21.
Fokkema, Jacob; Jansen, Leo; Mulder, Karel, “Sustainability: necessity for a prosperous society” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6(3), March, 2005, 219-228.
Gell-Mann, Murray “Transitions to a More Sustainable World” The Quark and the Jaguar, New York: 1994, (In The ELP Reader, 323-344)
Ikeda, Motohiro “South Korea; damage for establishment the state of science” The Nikkei Newspaper, January 11, 2006, Morning Ed., 9.
Meiland, Jack W. “College Thinking: How To Get the Best Out of College”, New York: New American Library, 1981 (In The ELP Reader, 1-24)
Morgan, Edmund S. “What Every Yale Freshman Should Know” Reading in English, Prentice Hall: 1961,27-33.
Shannon, Thomas A. “Introduction: What is Bioethics?” An Introduction to Bioethics (Third Edition), New York: 1997 (In The ELP Reader 2005 267-273).
Sharpe, Virginia A. “Science, bioethics and the public interest: On the need for transparency” The Hastings Center Report, 32(3), Hastings-on Hudson, May/June 2002, 23-27.
Silver, Lee M. “Cloning" Remaking Eden How Genetic Engeneering and Cloning Will Transform the American Family”, New York: 1998 (In The ELP Reader 2005 217-251).
Smith, Meritt Roe “Technology, Industrialization, and the Idea of Progress in America” Responsible Science, Ed. Kevin B. Byrne, Saint Peter, Minnesota: 1986, (In The ELP Reader 2005 293-310).
The Council of Scientific Technology and Research (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan). The Report of Intra-organization Council of Ethics.
http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shinkou/seimei/2001/hai3/011201.htm
The Interacademy Panel. IAP Statement on Biosecurity November 7, 2005.
http://www.interacademies.net/iap
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Key Issues in Biotechnology. New York, Geneva, 2002.
http://stdev.unctad.org/themes/biotech/docs.html

Future Image

2006-01-25T10:10:00.000+09:00

This map is about the fare of electricity of each country.

countries in deep blue means the nations need more money to use electricity. you can see there are so many such countries in Africa.

I think this is one of the most serious problem about "net fertility". To carry out sustainable development, solving this unfairness of obtaining resources is essential.

Brain death is real death or not

2006-01-25T07:46:00.000+09:00

'Death' Once human beings are born in this world, no one can not escape from it. Death is equally come, everyone should die someday. There is no exception, even if he or she is rich, genius and well known, they can not avoid death. Thus, “what death is” have been thought as remarkable problem and argued for a long time in every where from west to east. In addition, the new concept of death appeared recently, that is ‘brain death’. This essay will talk about death especially the current problem “brain death is real death or not”.

To begin with, before talking whether brain death is death or not, it should be needed to define ‘death’ because there are various definitions about it. It can be influenced by various factors, such as religion, history, environment and experience. Due to this problem, it is hard, almost impossible to make one agreement to death. Wittegenstein argued that ‘Death is not lived through’ (Oxford 1). According to him, death is opposite concept to live. Plat maintained the difference between death and live, that is “death is the release of the soul from the body” (Chorion 47). Similar to Plato, Epicurus insisted that death is ‘the absence of the sensation (Chorion 60). Both of them mentioned that the soul and the body are able to separate.
From the different aspect of the view, from the medical view, Kung claimed that death is the state of the body which has no possibility to recover (19). He also insists that “death is the irreversible loss of the vital function” (Kung 19). It implies that the standard of the death is changeable due to the progress of medical science. In generally, irreversible loss of the vital function is defined as ‘somatic death’ or ‘clinical death’ which probably seemed as common and well-known criterion of the death. They mean death is stop breathing and heart beating (Mason 281). By adding one more standard, ‘the dilating of the pupils’, it becomes “San-Tyoukousi theory” which is widely accepted not only by the people but also by the law in Japan. On the contrary, ‘biological death’ means the death of each cell of the body, thus it occurs slowly (Smith 268). It also can be said the death after somatic or clinical death. There are so many definitions and opinions to death, and hard to make agreement, but in this essay, it is defined as ‘the state which has no possibility to recover’.

The problem of Brain death arises with the progress of the medicine, life-prolonging device, and it caused the controversial issue, that is “brain death is real death or not.” Generally, there are three types of brain death, and ‘the death of all brain’ and ‘the death of the brain stem’ can be death, because patients last their lives by machines not by themselves and there is no possibility to recover. First one is ‘the death of whole part of the brain’ and he or she is irrecoverable. Patients who are under this state can not keep their lives by themselves, because the brain stem which control breath and circulation stopped working. In addition, they can not live longer, most of the case, it is said a few days is maximum. In Japan, this brain death is tended to think as brain death. The following one is ‘the death of brain stem.’ In this case, some part of the brain is still working and do not die whole part. Since their brain stem died, they can not breathe by themselves. In addition, from this view, since the brain stem died, the death of all brain function is also defied as brain death. In Britain, people use this standard to judge brain death. The last one is ‘the death of cerebrum.’ Some people say that cerebrum makes human as human, and the loss of cerebrum means death as a human. However, people under this state can keep their life without using machines, because their brain stem is still alive. This state is also called ‘vegetable state’ and, generally they are regard as different from brain death in Japan. To sum up, the state which people can not live without machine and there is no possibility to recover can be regard as brain death.

There are three types of brain death, the death of whole brain, the brain stem, the cerebrum. The cerebrum brain death should not regard as brain death, because they can live by their own power, and also have some possibility to recover. These characteristic make it different from other brain death. On the other hand, the death of whole brain and brain stem can be regard as brain death, because the patients wait for death and it will happen in the near future. However, since "what death is" is different and depend on each person, it is hard to make complete agreement about to whether brain death is human death or not. This essay conclude that whole brain death and brain stem death is brain death, but the last decision should be done by each person because ‘what death is’ is different from each person.

Works cited
Choron, Jacques. Death and Western thought London: Collier Books, 1963

Cohen, Cynthia B. Casebook on the termination of life-sustaining treatment and the care of the dying. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988

Kung, Hans. Eternal life? Life after death as a medical, philosophical, and theological problem New York: Image Books, 1984
Mason, J .K. Law and medical ethics London: Butterworths, 1994
Oxford. The Oxford book of death New York: Oxford University Press, 1983
Smith, George P. Bioethics and the Law. Lanham: University Press of America, 1993

Bioethics Essay- Human Cloning: It Possibility and It Ambition

2006-01-25T02:11:00.000+09:00

Introduction

Recently, there are great developments about the domain of bioethics. Especially cloning has attracted the world view in order to apply to large fields. It is true that cloning would be the effective key point to solve the issues which people have nowadays. However, accompanying by the development of this bioethical technology, new issues is becoming problem. Human cloning can be said that one of the main difficulties which it issues is extended in comprehensive realms. Regardless of these issues, people advance human cloning to next step without guarantee on it effects. Therefore, the impulsion of human cloning seems to be a competition among the technology of each country. What people should better do is to throw this kind of ambition and face directly to issues which occur without any prejudices, if there is at least one effective factor.

Discussion
Can Human Cloning Realize

In 1997, the news about Dolly, who was the first creature to success to have been cloned run over the world and picked up in the media. Silver in his text, indicates that this story was discussed everyday and people were not able to stop talking about it (219). Moreover, Beardsley maintains that cloning become an important aid in all manner of bioethical and biological investigation or treatment (2). Therefore, hopes through the use of clone have increased but, despite of this expectation, the fear toward it use has also grown at the same time. For example, the issue against cloning cow. The produce of this species are getting popular, but there exist a controversy like whether it can eat safely (Oishi 138). This cause seems to be unaccustomed ness of people to eat cloned creature indeed. However, regardless of the anxiety, one part of cloning cow’s meat was vended without announcement in Japan which demonstrates that this meat is from cloning cow. To apologize, the government held a large number of public relations on their safety, but it was not enough. Therefore, this affair can be the testimony that how the technology which name is clone is weak yet. However, recognizing the anxiety of public, some scientists tend to go forward to apply cloning to human cloning. There are people who have doubts about it and they try to stop human cloning as well.

Christian View

Moreover, the organization which has the most opposite opinion against human cloning is Christianity. Actually, Pope Jean Paul the second urged on it and this means that human cloning is unmoral as Christian community said that euthanasia invades god’s domain as well (Oishi 144, Wennberg 256). However, it seems that Christianity tends to consider that human nativity depends on gods will. Therefore, to produce the new lives according to human technology signify that the faith might change. Moreover, this thought which of the gods’ will does not come out suddenly. In other word, this concept may have been accumulated through the long process of history and to explain, the system of perception will greatly relate. Fisher describes perception as selective, which means that people tend to choose the fact convenient to them (81). In history, Christianity had chosen the fact that is reasonable especially in the middle age of Europe. Of course it does not mean that Christianity is wrong, but it is also the fact that they eliminated rational truth. Fisher also insists perception as evaluative (88). People tend to evaluate under their own convenience and allow idea which they selected maintaining. This logic can displace to Christianity as well. However, excessively, if the organ transplant is the only solution to solve the mortal disease, it is severe to refuse it from clone. Therefore, Christian community should at least consider human cloning apart from the concept for a while and examine it in a broad view.

What People Can Do with Human Cloning

It is necessary for people to grasp the result which comes up by the use of human cloning in order to make its issues clear. The merits of human cloning are first, cloned human can replace army and also transform it more powerful as Silver said in his text (231). Moreover, it can solve the declining birth rate. Especially, Japanese declining rate is getting worst every year, so this merit might be the most realistic one. Similarly human cloning would be a hope for parent who does not have children or sterile woman. However it is doubtful that these kinds of effect which is suggested above do not disturb the human right. As people at least do not accustom to come into contact with cloned human, it is sure that there will take place a severe prepossession against them. Moreover, if scientists escalate to use the technology of human in a wrong way, they may produce a concoction of human and horse for instance. This is an impeccable abuse of technology and the rights of life.

According to above, people have a threat to forget that cloned person is “one” human being who naturally have rights as well as ordinary human. Moreover, accompanying the development of technology, people tend to be haughty. For example, the colleague of Hwang, who is a scientist told a lie that he found the ES cells (which have a connection to clone), and Korean people suggested him to stay in laboratory and continue his study toward cloning (Holden 1402). The reason is that Hwang is the closest person to Novel Prize. Therefore, it seems the technology of cloning is becoming one of the “tools” to show the power which each country have. Actually, human cloning is now the leading edge of clone technology and this might be a “good” plead to explain the oblivion of human rights.

Conclusion

If people do not matter of human rights, it is obvious that human cloning will help one’s life in broad ways. However, as one human being, it is impossible to ignore the issues which may probably break out in the future. To make a better connection between human cloning, all the people should throw away the ambition and the concept which it have been accumulated for a long time, and face directly to human cloning, if there are any effectiveness.

Work Cited
Beardsley Tim. “A Clone in Sheep’s Clothing” Science & Technology at Scientific American.com (1997):26-27 paras.03 March.1997 <http://www.sciam.com>.
Fisher Aubrey. “Perception of Self” International Communication: Pragmatics of Human Relationships McGraw Hill Book Company: New York, 1987. (In the ELP Reader).
Holden Constance. “Science. Vol 310, no 5753, pages 1373-1573” p.1402
Oishi, Masamichi. “Kuroonningen ha jitsuzai suruka” Idenshikumikae to Kuroon. Tokyo:Natsume Sha, 2001.
Silver Lee M. “Cloning” Remaking Eden How Genetic Engineering and Cloning will transform the American Family Harper Collins Publishers, Inc:New York, 1998. (In the ELP Reader).
Wennberg Robert N. “Euthanasia: An Introduaction” Terminal Choices: Euthanasia, Suicide, and the Right to Die William B. Edermans Publishing Company, 1989. (In the ELP Reader).

My Image of Future

2006-01-25T01:35:00.000+09:00

My image of future is this picture. The title is Sunflower in Japanese ( I wonder if the name of this in English is the same as in Japanese, but the painter is Vincent van Goch.

Why I chose this one is not only I like the sunflower which is drown here, but each flowers looks like a human face, or the expression. The lively color: yellow means that the future is might be blight because of the development of technology and so on, but when we look at the face of each person, they are not always "happy" from their heart ( there are flowers which bend their head, which see the side). It means that technology will become more usefull for us in many ways, but as a cost, people must sacrifice the "poor"people or environment etc...So, what is lively in our future is very surperficial and subtle as well.

But as a whole, this picture especially the color yellow give us some kind of energy to make our future clear and true happyness. So, this picture may also means that people can recover issues which might occur according to the technological development. I think this picture discribe the negative point about our future, but the positive point too.

my image of future

2006-01-25T00:28:00.000+09:00

I selected this picture as my image of future.
This woman is one of a group of nomads called the Himba lives in the Republic of Namibia, Africa. The small tribe is rarely seen, and its lifestyle and culture have remained almost completely unchanged for nearly 500 years.

You may say that this is not like a future because there is no robot, high building, UFO etc.

However in my opinion, human's life will not change so dramatically also in the future. Technology have been improved rapidly especially in developed countries, but it is just a small area considering the whole world.

I learnd a lot from this picture.

Japanese life have been changed rapidly but there are some people whoes life haven't been changed in the world.

Cultural diversity and minority's life should be respected.

Human's nature is not different from people in the ancient world.
(Human can not live without nature)
Human will survive everywhere no matter how hard to live there.

That's all. Thank you. BYE!!

work cited
http://www.epson.co.jp/contest/gallery/nha/2005/02.html

Essay: Bioethics and Genome Business

2006-01-25T00:02:00.000+09:00

Introduction
There are many projects to study DNA of human all over the world, and these projects have some advantages like a business side and medical side. Some companies and institutions research human’s DNA for medical treatments and products. For example, “genome project” is to research human’s DNA information and constitution by scholars, universities and companies with assistance from countries. However, genome business might conflict with bioethics. For instance, it is a bio ethics problem that some companies try to take patents about human’s DNA information, because there are public opinions that a particular group should not monopolize a right of human’s DNA information.

What are DNA and Genome Business?
First of all, DNA is the abbreviation that means “Deoxyribonucleic Acid,” and it was discovered in the sperm of trout from the Rhine River in 1871 (Watson 1). In the 1950s the double helix structure of DNA was first unraveled (Trefil 255). These events was a first step of to study human’s DNA, and then scholars have increased knowledge about basic chemical working of the cell.
There are many types of Genome project between countries or companies (Moody 180). A first genome project was founded in 1988, and the institution name is Human Genome Organization. In the 1990s each country started to study human genome. For example, University of Tokyo established the Human Genome Center in 1991. In April 2003, USA, UK, Japan, France, Germany and China declared to finish analysis of human genome (HGC). This also is a start of post human genome project like development of genome medicines. According to Daly, “Genetic engineering or recombinant DNA technology is the technique of introducing hybrid DNA containing genes of interest into organisms in order to make the organisms produce a product of interest such as an enzyme, hormone or other protein” (3).
The relationship between genome information and business is significant, because genome information have many business chances like regeneration treatment, gene treatment and medicine. There are many illnesses that have roots in DNA, but there were no treatments in past days. However, it would be able to cure these illnesses with genome information and treatment. Some pharmaceutical and venture companies noticed that to study human genome could make huge profit; therefore many companies have competed in the genome project. In fact, some institutions tried to take patents about genome technologies.

Medical Advantages
A good aspect of developing genome technologies is to discover new treatment for obstinate disease and injury. There are some possibilities that to cure cancer or to make new parts of body and organ, moreover to release specific remedy for respiratory infection. Naturally these things would connect business closely.
First, one medical advance is to be able to take treatments for each patient with analyzing DNA, and this treatment is called “Tailored Therapy” (Kondo 36). Each patient has different constitution because of DNA; consequently an effect of medicine is very different by each person. However if it is possible to analyze a patient DNA information before treatment, it could order a drug for the patient without side effects, and it also could make medicine for illness related to DNA.
Second is to make a new part of human body or organ, and this is called “Regeneration Medicine.” If a person should be operated organ transplant, the patient could use own new parts of organ by biotechnology. This medicine would help people like a person who was critically hurt in a traffic accident.

Bioethics Problems
Advancing biotechnologies and genome businesses cause some bioethics problems and are influenced by public opinion. One example of bioethics problem is allowing to parental choice about genetic makeup of their children. People have fear of homogenization society that there is no diversity of human and mind (Caplan 221). In addition, to make designed humans might cause new type of discrimination, because there are differences between normal and designed humans in ability or appearance.
Moral is another problem that it can be allowed or not to take patents about human’s DNA information by companies, because most of public opinion oppose monopolizing DNA information by particular institution. Companies cannot be managed without profit, thus they will not use biotechnologies for developing nations because poor countries cannot pay the cost (Moses & Cape 9). This makes medical divide between advanced nations and developing nations.

Conclusion
There is both strong and weak point in development of biotechnologies, and genome business also has good and bad side for society. According to Trefil, many ethical issues must be resolved before biotechnologies come into widespread use (257). While people should use biotechnologies for benefit for human society, they should try to concern and solve issues about biotechnologies.

Works Cited
Caplan, Arthur L. “What’s Morally Wrong with Eugenics?” Controlling our destinies: historical, philosophical, ethical, and theological perspectives on the Human Genome Project. Ed. Phillip R. Sloan. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2000.

Daly, Peter. The biotechnology business: a strategic analysis. London: F. Pinter, 1985.

HGC: The Official Website of Human Genome Center.

Kondo, Yoshihiro. Genome Business. Tokyo: Chuokeizaisya, 2001.

Moody, Glyn. Digital code of life: how bioinformatics is revolutionizing science, medicine, and business. Hoboken: Wiley, 2004.

Moses, Vivian & Cape, Ronald E. Biotechnology. Switzerland: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1991.

Trefil, James. The Edge of the Unknown. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1996.

Watson, James D. The DNA story: a documentary history of gene cloning. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Co, 1981.

My image of the Future

2006-01-24T23:40:00.000+09:00

I think that you can see the tallest building in this picture. This building is called "X-Seed 4000" and designed by Taisei Construction Corporation. The height is 4,000 meters and 500,000 to 1,000,000 people could live in the building. I think that the image is one possibillity of Tokyo, because people will face a problem of population explosion.

Essay Cloning; Is It Necessity?

2006-01-24T23:37:00.000+09:00

In recent years, technology is progressing increasingly, and also people are more interested in it. Cloning is one of example. According to Amagasa, the technology which makes a clone is already established. It has only problem that how to brake ethical problems (121). There are pros and cons, because cloning is greatly related to a life of human being. In addition, it is questionable that cloning is necessity for people. This essay will argue that the necessity of cloning with discussing positive point and negative point.

Cloning technology is progressing little by little, therefore it is time to consider about it. It is obvious that there are many positive points in cloning. First of all, people think that a cloning technology will protect the animals which face on crisis of extinction, or serve as a means for getting back the life of pets. In addition, people go forward the project which revives prehistoric animals such as mammoth gradually ( Nojima 106). In the case of human, although, the controversy continued, it may become one way of breeding such as in vitro fertilization, surrogate mother and so on. Furthermore, gene manipulation is also helpful for people. It means that gene manipulation can remove the risk of a hereditary disease ( Amagasa, 13) and also it can improve a gene, in order to prolong a life, to intensification immunity or to raise intelligence. Furthermore, a number of people can be saved by clone such as organ transplant treatment of sterility and so on.

Additionally, a high quality animal can be mass-produced by cloning technology. It helps for people such as foods, Seeing Eye dog and so on. If animal can be made mass-production, people can get high-class foods at a low price. Moreover, it can be more easily to bring up Seeing Eye dog. When aging will progress from now on, it can predict that the demand of a Seeing Eye dog or a partner dog increases. Therefore, if they can be made mass production, it is sure that they are helpful for people.

It is certain that when people take advantage of newest technology, there are disadvantage points. There are lots of examples, automobile or development of forest. People know that automobile and development of forest have demerit, but they make people life more comfortable, also people depend on them. It is difficult for people to live without them. If people keep away from technology of cloning, progress of technology will stagnate ( Kolata 186-187).　Besides, some people feel about clone like a monster, but there are no differences between clone and identical twins. To create a clone completely same as natural person is impossible. “she will be a unique human being, with a completely unique consciousness and unique set of memories that she will build from scratch” (Silver, 230). That is to say, clone also has characteristic.

Even if there are positive points of cloning, it is true that cloning has lots of complicated problems. First problem is the safety. There is no verification of safety, cloning has high risk. When scientist created Dolly in 1996, they attempted more than 277 to succeed Dolly. Human cloning is more complicated than Dolly, and it has great risks such as disease. Therefore, scientists fear disease in human cloning (Jones ). Besides, life of cloned animal is shorter than other animal. Not only a life is shorten, but also lots of strange phenomena which are not solved yet have appeared in a clone such as the gap with the mitochondrial gene of a donor's ovum, influence by some genes not working and so on. There still remain a lot of problems of safety.

Second problem is discrimination. There will be discrimination between human and cloned animal. According to Silver, it is difficult to draw a line and where can people draw it ( 238 ). However, most people consider that it can draw a line between cloned human and natural birth. This is discrimination. “Some people argue that children may suffer a diminished sense of individuality and personal autonomy. A cloned child may feel that their future is constrained by the life path of their gene donor”( Jones ). It is serious problem. Furthermore, people will disregard them, because they think that substitute of cloned animal can be made easily ( Kass, 27). For example, there is mother who lost her child because of accident, and she create clone of her child. However, she thinks clone whom she creates is not like her child, therefore she abandons clone and create another clone. This is possible to occur. This conduct is against moral. Life should respect. People should never make light of life ( Glenn, 53). It is obvious that problem of discrimination will be occurred, because discrimination against blacks still continues. In spite of being the same human beings, they make light of only by the skin color. To solve the problem which is discrimination between a clone and human being is not easy. In addition, some scientists states that it is not problem to create only organ for organ transplant ( Kolata, 64). However, even if only organ, it is part of human body, and it can not solve the ethical is possibility that this conduct is murder. How to treat clone is difficult.

Another problem will be considered. Most people want to clone to create superior people such as, intensification immunity, raise intelligence and so on. If cloning prevails in the world, the world will become fake world. Cloned animal will gain power and control human because they are superior (Glenn, 33-34). Hence, there is probability that war will begin between clone and human. Conflict will not stop ceasing. Moreover, the serious problem is that if all people can live around 100 yards old, the earth will have great changed. Things which is necessary to live such as foods, places to live, and energy are decreased because of increase of population. It can predict that people will begin to war. In the past, there was war caused by acquisition energy, that is World War Ⅱ. Japan began to open the war in order to acquire oil. In addition, Nojima points out that an eternal life is not necessary for people. Life has limit therefore it has great value (136). People die some day, for that reason, people want to live hard and become to make much of a life. To control a life is against natural providence. The earth will be destroyed if natural providence collapses.

It is true that cloning has many positive points. Lots of people will be saved by cloning technology. However, there are also lots of demerits. It is certain that to control a life is against natural providence, and it will lead to destroy the earth, if natural providence collapses. It seems to be meaningless that the earth is ruined, even if a number of people will be saved and live more comfortable by cloning.

Works cited
Amagasa, Keisuke Genetically modified and technique of clone. Tokyo;
Asano Jyunji, 2000.
Glenn, McGee The human cloning debate. California; Berkeley, 2003.

Jones, Anita. Human cloning. April 8, 1998. December 20, 2005.
<http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~jones/tmp352/projects98/group1/how.html>
Kass Leon R. and Wilson James Q. The ethics of human cloning. Washington, D.C.;
AEI Press, 1998.
Kolata, Gina. Clone. New York; W. Morrow & Co., 1998.

Nojima, Hiroshi. and Ishida, maki. “A clone, reproduction, and gene therapy.”
The key of the newest post-genome. Kyoto; Kagakudoujin, 2003: 93-124.

Silver, LeeM. “Cloning” Remaking Eden how Genetic Engineering and Cloning Will
Transform the American Family. New York; HarperCollins Publishers, Inc, 1998.
( In The ELP Reader 2006, 217-252)

My image of future

2006-01-24T23:32:00.000+09:00

When I hear the word future, I think of space travel first. In my image, the world in future is created by high level technology such as cars which fly in the sky.
To say briefly, my future’s image is DORAEMON. There may be lots of robots which help human such as DORAEMON. I hope so. I want to see the world like DORAEMON.
However, to think seriously, I also think that there are more problems that solution is difficult than today. Human will be at a loss what they should do with the problem.

Essay: Examining the Legitimacy of Euthanasia

2006-01-24T23:27:00.000+09:00

With the significant advance in medical science, it has become much easier to prolong life by using potent medications and sophisticated medical device. As a result, an increasing number of people in the end of their lives have come to be suffering from incurable diseases or be in the vegetative state, for which euthanasia is proposed as “a solution” (Wennberg 256). Following this situation, there appears to be growing acceptance of passive euthanasia that means letting patients die by withholding medical treatment. However, public opinion is divided on active euthanasia or mercy killing, which involves direct action to accentuate a death. This essay will argue that voluntary active euthanasia, as well as passive one, is morally justifiable for several reasons, though there is a problem to be considered with great care.

There are some arguments that support the moral legitimacy of euthanasia. Firstly, euthanasia can liberate patients from their intolerable pain and sufferings with which their days become, expressed by Sir William Osler, “death in life” (qtd. in Wennberg 256). As Narita states in his lecture, it may be true that most physical pain can be removed by advanced pain treatment. However, he also points out that mental suffering has been greatly increased and therefore become more serious problem (qtd. in Hosaka 50), which makes another reason for endorsing euthanasia. This second argument is that it will protect human dignity of patients by ending their artificially prolonged lives. Modern development of medical technology has brought about those conditions where patients are just kept alive, being unable to do anything on their own. Some patients would see their lives as miserable and meaningless, feeling deprived of the dignity as human. It is often wrongly assumed that keeping life materially is always of paramount importance. However, in certain circumstances, allowing a patient to choose a peaceful end by practicing euthanasia could be more humane and therefore morally justifiable.

Another plausible argument justifying euthanasia is the concept of the right to die, which has its ground on individualism or autonomy. Since people have the basic right to make decision on their personal issues, or the right to live in the way they like as long as respecting others’ rights, it could be argued that there should be the right to make decision about one’s own death. Hosaka notes that individualism lies under the advocacy of euthanasia which presupposes that individual is most important, superior to any regulations (47). The foundation for the right to die can also be explained in terms of autonomy, which given by Beauchamp and Childress as the first of four principles of biomedical ethics (Kuzuu and Kawami 4). Autonomy, or self determination, is the central concept that gave rise to the right of treatment refusal, which later developed into the right to die (“Right to Die, Policy and Law”). Supported by the concept of individualism and autonomy, the right to die has come to be widely recognized. For example, Cobb, Jr. seems to endorse it when he questions whether we have “the right to force one to live” if he or she yearns for death (47). However, it should not be exercised as the right to commit suicide in the ordinary sense, since there might be many different alternatives, which makes its situation quite different from euthanasia.

Those who oppose euthanasia may contend that this action is morally objectionable because human should not manipulate life and death. According to Wennberg, some of religiously serious people, especially Christians, seem to believe that euthanasia will make us “interlopers poaching on God’s domain” (258). However, human beings have controlled life and death, or in the words of Cobb, Jr., “play God” (47-48) in many other areas. He names several examples such as prolonging life by medical means, birth control, and death penalty (Cobb, Jr. 48). Taking all these facts into consideration, it is likely that euthanasia is not necessarily wrong and should not be condemned by such an argument that it violates the sanctity of life.

Although euthanasia can be accepted in terms of morality, its legalization involves the possibility of abuse, for which we have yet to find any perfect solution. Cobb, Jr. emphasizes this concern by stating that it would be difficult to draw a borderline between “their suicide and their murder by others” (58-60). It might even result in the most undesirable situation where the authority or government has the power to control euthanasia and uses it to eliminate certain groups of people, as Hosaka explains, mentioning the abuse by the Nazis as an example (13). There might be no measures to prevent the gross abuse completely, but Cobb, Jr. suggests that we need to seek a “moral code” or rules that ensure both the right to die and respect for individual life (60), and insists on the necessity of changes in public attitude, in medicine, and in law (67-68).

In this essay, the legitimacy of euthanasia has been examined by looking at both positive and negative dimensions of this controversial issue. It is true that the problem of possible abuse needs careful consideration to find a practical solution, but there seems to be enough reasons to justify euthanasia in terms of morality. Though opinions have been divided on this issue due to its multi-dimensional nature and unsolved problems, it appears that the public attitude toward active euthanasia, as well as passive one, has become more positive compared to that of old days. One of the most distinct outcomes of this transition may be the legalization of doctor-administered euthanasia in the Netherlands in April 2001. The situation has already begun to change, and it requires not just discussing the legitimacy of euthanasia but taking next step to take practical measures. As Cobb, Jr. claims, “reform is urgent” (67).
(959 words)

Works Cited
Cobb, Jr. John B. Matters of Life and Death. Kentucky: Westminster/ John Knox Press, 1991.

Hosaka, Masayasu. Anrakushi to Songenshi―Iryo no Naka no Sei to Shi [Euthanasia and Death with Dignity―Life and Death in Medical Care]. Tokyo: Kodansya, 1993.

Kuzuu, Eijiro, and Makoto Kawami. Inochi no Hou to Rinri [Law and Ethics of Life], 3rd ed. Japan: Horitsu Bunka Sya, 2004.

Meisel, Alan. “Right to Die, Policy and Law.” Encyclopedia of Bioethics. 3rd ed. ed. Stephen G. Post, et al. The United States: Thomson Gale, 2004: vol.4, 2385-2395.

Wennberg, Robert N. Terminal Choices: Euthanasia, Suicide, and The Right to Die. Exter: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989. (In The ELP Reader, 2005. 243-265)

My essay: I've not gone yet!

2006-01-24T23:05:00.000+09:00

Introduction
Today, many problems about euthanasia can be found around the world but it is very difficult to understand what it is. Euthanasia is “the practice of killing without pain a person who is suffering from a disease that cannot be cured or from extreme old age, so that he or she can die with dignity” (Crowther 394), “a ‘mercy death’ implying measures deliberately taken by a physician to curtail pain and suffering in agonizing terminal and definitely fatal chronic conditions by the merciful infliction of death” (Halsey 466), and “continues to be regarded as contrary to humanitarian and ethical principles and is legally punishable” (Halsey 467). It seems to be ideal figure of death because no one must love unbearable pain and hope to die without dignity. However, euthanasia is not admitted in Japan, therefore we may not be able to choose the way we want to do when we are dying. Euthanasia Law should be enacted to decide one’s life by oneself who face problems related euthanasia.

The Means and Nature of Euthanasia
Euthanasia can be divided into the means and nature. Means are two kinds, active or passive. Active euthanasia is “identical with mercy killing and, roughly speaking, involves taking direct action to end a life” (Wennberg 258). On the other hand, passive euthanasia is “allowing a patient to die when he or she could be kept alive by the appropriate medical procedures” (Wennberg 259). However, these distinctions have little sense because they have same purpose of granting the patent’s wish and are, more or less, concerned about killing. Then, what is important? It is the best important to be one’s will, or not to be. The nature of euthanasia consists of three parts. First, voluntary euthanasia “that is, with the fully informed consent of the patient” (Wennberg 259). Second, involuntary euthanasia “that is against the will or wishes of the patient” (Wennberg 259). Finally, non-voluntary euthanasia “that is, without the consent of the patient, in circumstances where the patient isn’t able either to give or to withhold consent” (Wennberg 259). In these distinctions, involuntary euthanasia is only murder but other euthanasia is rational because the patient’s body is the patient’s and a doctor executes it as he wishes.

The Present Condition of Euthanasia In Japan
To tell the truth, In Japan euthanasia is admitted. I would like to show you two famous affairs related euthanasia. (1) Outline of Affair of Yamauchi Decision: In a certain town in Aichi, a father (age52 then) of man (Yamauchi, age24 then) fell flat by cerebral hemorrhage in Showa 31. Three years later, he hemorrhaged again and then he was paralyzed from the waste down. Accordingly, he became to implore his family to kill him by his pain. In Showa 36, doctor informed the man that his father's remaining days ware about 7 to 10. The man decided to relief his father from the pain. He, then, infected insecticide in milk and his mother gave father a drink it. His father, consequently, died and the man was blamed for patricide (Machino 252). (2) Tokai University Euthanasia Affair: In 1991, it was assumed that the assistant doctor in the attachment of Department of Medicine at Tokai University hospital (Kanagawa Prefecture Isehara City) received a strong request from the family of the patient. The patient had terrible pain, and then, was in coma and could not express his will. The assistant doctor injected potassium chloride etc. (a deadly poison) to make the patient die (Machino 345). In these decisions, requirements of euthanasia were demonstrated. six requirements of Euthanasia which was demonstrated by (1) are “In view of the knowledge and technology of the present medicine, patient must be risked by the fatal disease and the death must approach in the near future”, “It becomes the extent that patient’s pain is too awful for others to see him”, “It was entirely performed by the purpose of easing the patient's pain”, “The acceptance of the patient must be got while he is still conscious”, “There must be enough reasons when person executes it on patient without doctor's hand”, and “The method must be ethically assumed that it is appropriate” (Machino 256). Requirements of Active Euthanasia which was demonstrated by (2) are “The patient must suffer from an unbearable bodily pain”, “The patient must be inevitable from the death”, “There are not the alternative methods to ease patient's bodily pain”, and “There must be an expression of the will of the patient who approves shortening his life”. (Machino 352). In other words, euthanasia is admitted in the eyes of the law. However, in these cases, both defendants received a sentence of prison because it is very difficult to apply to all of these requirements. (Miyakawa 166) Therefore, it has not been impossible to enact Euthanasia Law yet if the present condition continues. First of all, Japanese government should make these decisions provision that Japanese government admit euthanasia, and all we have to do is inscription along its due process.

Conclusion
It is really true that a modern medical treatment tends to get in an excessive life-sustaining treatment. On the other hand, if euthanasia is legalized people who refuse a life-sustaining treatment may increase. However, it is very strong ethical problem they are hard to express their thought by ethic. Therefore, Euthanasia Law should be legislated to get easy to decide one’s life without hesitation of committing a crime if people face the problem related euthanasia.

essay- Vision of Legalization of Euthanasia: Prospect from euthanasia itself and Current Condition

2006-01-24T21:46:00.000+09:00

Introduction
Euthanasia is a controversial issue which plays a key role in patients' end of life. Therefore, considering whether euthanasia will be legalized in the future is important. According to Wreen, euthanasia is briefly killing or letting die (637), but advocacy of euthanasia claims that euthanasia is rather mercy because a patient can pass their painful time (Wennberg 256). Furthermore, the polls show the sign that the acceptance of euthanasia started to widespread (Ostheimer 123-124), and, euthanasia is substantially legal in some countries (Lo 183-185). On the contrary, there are considerable disagreements. For example, some Christians assert euthanasia is murder which is against God's will (Wennberg 258). In addition, its misuse after legalization and the uncertainty of patient's desire to die are also matters (Lo 261). Euthanasia can be discussed that it should not be legalized yet from these discussion points; the reality of euthanasia, how euthanasia is generally considered and analysis of the moves of public opinions, and prospect of possibility and problems for legalization.

What is euthanasia?
Before the discussion about possibility of legalization of euthanasia, the appreciation for euthanasia might be required to make the discussion deeper. The act of euthanasia means ending someone or something's life, but there is more to it than that.

Active and Passive euthanasia
What should be clarified is that euthanasia can be roughly categorized into two types; active euthanasia and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is the direct action to give a patient death, for example, giving a lethal dose of drug. Active euthanasia can hasten death painlessly so that it is sometimes called mercy killing. On the other hand, passive euthanasia is the permission to let a patient die without life-extending treatment (Wennberg 258-259). Treatment refusal, stopping the treatment in mid-flow, is not passive but active euthanasia because the physician should know the patient will die if the treatment is interrupted.

Voluntary, Non-voluntary, and Involuntary
Furthermore, there are also another three categories; voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia, and involuntary euthanasia. First one is the most preferable form of euthanasia which is done with informed consent of patients. Patient can request the practice on his own will, so it is called voluntary. Non-voluntary euthanasia is usually performed when a patient is unconscious, so it practices without any informed consent of patients. The patient's family would have discretion. Involuntary euthanasia is putted against a patient's will. It is the last thing patients and their surroundings need, in other words, murder (Wennberg 259).

For surveys
The arguable forms of euthanasia on surveys are mainly active voluntary euthanasia and passive euthanasia. The former one, active voluntary euthanasia, is brief euthanasia which is practiced when a patient requests physician to kill him by some means. A patient is usually set as an incurable or terminal disease patient. This situation might be suitable to consider active euthanasia because a patient himself requires euthanasia with convincing reason. The latter one is passive euthanasia; it is more acceptable to public, because it might seem to be near natural death.

Public attitudes
Pro-euthanasia
Advocates of euthanasia insists that euthanasia is mercy killing which can get rid of pain and misery from terminal or incurable ill, and it is natural for a patient to die by his own will. Colebrook points out that victims of cancer have to stand in both physical and mental misery (cited in Wennberg 256). Death with long, painful, and miserable ending can undermine patients’ human dignity so euthanasia is called mercy killing. Another type of advocacy is that patients’ will should have a priority, so it would be unnatural to keep alive against patients’ own will (Sawyer 523).

Anti-euthanasia
On the other hand, there are many people opposing the concept of euthanasia because of their uncertainty, morality based on law, and religion. One big anxiety is whether patients necessarily need euthanasia (Wennberg 257). In the last stage of incurably ill, some patients possibly have depression at the same time, and if the patients are depressed, candidates within these patients for euthanasia increase 4.6 times (Lo 184). Once the patients get better alleviation, some of them would stop demanding for euthanasia (Lo 185). Furthermore, laws which makes basis of morality prohibit murder, so it should be one reason (Vaux 11). In addition, religions also deeply link to the denial for euthanasia. For example, Catholic tends to concern that euthanasia is against God’s will, and people should be treated better as much as possible with mercy (Wennberg 256).

Comments on surveys
The result of some surveys, it can be described that about half people, especially younger generation favor euthanasia, and more people accept passive euthanasia but the result is fluid. Elder generation would be more conservative and younger one is not, and this difference can be seen on (1) and (2). Passive euthanasia, including treatment refusal in this case, has also preferable result in the polls. It might be because passive euthanasia seems farther from murder than active one (Ostheimer 124). However, what most influenced and what should be noticed is that the tone of the question can slightly control the result (Wennberg 263). From these surveys, it can be assumed that younger generation tends to accept euthanasia especially passive one though there are also hesitating people.
-I can't post graphs... sorry!-(Graphs from Ostheimer 126)

Possibility and problems of legalization
Comparison with abortion
Considering what has been discussed here, euthanasia seems to follow the history of abortion from illegal to legal. The current condition of abortion is more widely accepted and practiced than euthanasia is, though abortion used to be illegal. Abortion came to be legal in the early 1960s, but before that, the situation surrounding abortion is similar to current euthanasia (Binkin 163). In fact, euthanasia is generally illegal but in Holland and Oregon, euthanasia is substantially legal (Lo 183). Therefore, euthanasia can be seen now on stage to be admitted as well as previous abortion.

Misuse and misjudge
What most opponents are worried about is the possibility to misuse or misjudge euthanasia after legalization which can threat physician-patient relationship. If euthanasia is legalized, “the possibility of gross abuse“, which means that patients might be abused by undesirable euthanasia, will emerge (Wennberg 261). The weak and useless patient can be discarded from society, and terminally ill patient can be eliminated because of his medical cost and so on. Once physician failed to put euthanasia, patient will leave or change physician (Lo 185). Purdy asserts that euthanasia should not be legalized yet until physician-patient relationship has consistent because of its delicacy (Purdy 234).

Conclusion
In conclusion, public attitude toward euthanasia is still very confusing because of the issue’s delicacy, so it might need more time to be considered. People should know what euthanasia is correctly, how public opinion is changing, and how the possibility and issues emerge.

My Essay

2006-01-24T20:38:00.000+09:00

Merit and Demerit points of Cloning: People should not Clone

Introduction
People try to clone animal until now. Cloning technology was first developed in the early 1970’s. In 1973, scientist succeeded to insert into the bacterium E. coli to DNA. On June 23, 1976, the National Institutes of Health published a set of guidelines for work with recombinant DNA. And on February 23, 1997, Dolly who had been cloned directly from a single cell taken from the breast tissue of an adult donor was born. Dolly’s birth gave rise to the prospect that other mammal like human beings could clone. This essay will argue that people should not clone, especially, human cloning though cloning has not only demerit but also merit points.

Definition of Cloning
When Dolly was born, because Dolly was introduced by the public, people knew the meaning of “cloning”. According to Volti, cloning has been called gene splicing because the technique involves inserting or splicing, the gene containing fragment of DNA from one species into DNA, which can propagate million or more copies of the cloned gene in bacterial cells in a short time (cited 214) or Silver argue that “cloning” means the process by which a cell, or group of cells, from one individual organism and characteristic of clone is genetically identical to the ancestor cell or organism from which it is derived (221). For example, bacteria which is single-cell organisms can clone and it is natural for bacteria. When bacterial reproduction takes place through cell division, the two daughter cells are clones of each other. Thus, definition of cloning is the process of making copy and it can make million or more copy.

Profit of Individual
Cloning for Treatment
If people do cloning, it will become epoch-making skill for them. However, clone has merit and demerit points. Merit points are the profit of individuals and society. First, one of the merits of individuals is the cloning becomes method of new treatment of unsolved sterility. Eisenberg argue that women who does not have egg cell or man who can not make sperm in life, can make child that have connection with biological (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein 158), and according to NABER, it is possible to put up the rate of pregnancy, people clone oosperm and multiply it to transplant in uterus (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein158). The profit of cloning as sterility treatment becomes bigger when more and more people do not have other way to cure is there. Secondly, people can make organs or tissues which are necessary for transplant by cloning. If people can make human clone, people do not have to look for donor who have compatible organs or tissues and it can greatly decrease risk of rejection. These organs or tissues can not be only made from ES cell (embryonic stem cell). People can make every kind of organs like kidney, heart, liver, but these organs can be made from animal, pig. Pig is very similar with human beings and they can make substitution organs. Of course, if people use pig, rejection will occur. Thus, people must use transgenic pig. If people use organs made from ES cell or transgenic pig, nerve cells might be useful as a cure for Parkinson’s disease, and freshly grown blood vessels could be used to replace those that are damaged by arteriosclerosis (cited in Silver 250).

Cloning Children
Thirdly, Robertson argues that when mate of couple has element of crucial hereditary disease, cloning can make children who does not inherit the element of disease (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein159). Parents also do not have to worry about disease. Finally, Robertson argues that people can make their dead child by cloning (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein160). However, cloning does not mean making same child. They are different in character and personality.
Cloning can make child who has same gene with original child. But according to Thomas, if people made their dead child by cloning, they might get over the shock (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein161).

Profit of Society
In society of profit of merit point, first, cloning can reproduce person who has great ability, genius, and historical character. For example, Mozart, Einstein, Gandhi, and Schweitzer. These people might bring profit to whole society. Because these people have great endowment, they might accomplish great things if their achievements were fostered by environment and current of history and people can not reproduce the same environment. Secondly, people can know more knowledge about human cloning. According to Walters, practice and research of human cloning will bring important advance in the field of incidence of human (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein 163). However, it does not admit that people make human clone only for their research or profit. Silver argues that with such a low rate of success, the direct engineering of genes within an isolated human embryo which destined to be a child is not something that anyone would try or accept (250). But if human clone become safety and surefire thing to clone people, people can obtain new science knowledge.
There are many merit points of cloning and these are useful for people. However, there are many demerit points of cloning as well as merit points.

Harm of Individual
Demerit points of cloning also divided into two kinds of harm, to individual and to society. First, harm to individual is Callahan argues that twin who born after is clone because clone and original person are identical twin, has possibility that influence psychological burden or disorder (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein 171). It is certain that when twin who born after know the way of twin who born early, twin who born after occur psychological effect. If the child is the clone of original person who has special ability or achievement, the child will feel redundant pressure that must do same achievement like ancestor. Twin who born after compel sacrifice and blame burden. Secondly, in the process of human cloning, clone accompanies high risk. For example, oosperm do not be implanted, it does not growth, it does not develop, the process does not work well, and disabilities might appear harm in clone that people do not expect. According to Weiss, people use adult cell when people make clone, thus, variation accumulate gradually in cell and clone might fulminate easily to become cancer or elderly disease (cited in Nussbaum and Sunstein 171). Finally, if people do cloning, some people might forge cell or organs. In Korea, Hwang Woo Suk who is professor in Seoul University, forged ES cell (embryonic stem cell). He forged 9 stock of 11 stock of ES cell and other 2 stock were not ES cell of clone embryo (CNN.co.jp). Thus, people who might forge will appear.

Human Clone Law
There are many merit and demerit points of cloning but people should be ban clone by law because human cloning is very dangerous and difficult technique.. It is important that safety of human cloning. According to Silver, for human beings, it is a question of whether it could work safely (cited in Silver 227). Nobody can guarantee it clearly. Thus, many countries prohibit human cloning by law. For example, Germany, WHO (World Health Organization), France, EU (European Union), England, Italy, are ban human cloning by law. America and Japan are regulated human cloning but they do not have legal restriction. But in America, in September 2004, President Bush endorsed to ban all human cloning. However, Korea is not prohibiting human cloning.

Conclusion
If people do human clone, it will threaten human right and people will trifle human life. Thus, people must consider about human cloning. The best way is people should not clone, human cloning.

Work Cited
“Efforts of Ban Human Cloning”. The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 99,
No.1. Jan. 2005
<http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9300%28200501%2999%3A1%3C266%3AETBHC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Q>.

Hwang Guilty of Fraud: SNU - OhmyNews International
<http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?no=268365&rel_no=1>.

Nussbaum, Martha C. and Sunstein, Cass R. “Facts and Fantasies About Human Cloning” Clones and clones. New York. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.1998

Silver, Lee M. “Cloning” Remaking Eden How Genetic Engineering and Cloning Will Transform the American Family. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.1998 (In The ELP Reader, 2005.217-251.)

Volti, Rudi. The Facts On File Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Society. New York ,1999

My image of future

2006-01-24T20:37:00.000+09:00

This is my image of “future”. The title is “Alien Landscapes” painted by Bryce. I think in the future, there are no lands because iceberg will melt. So, the lands of all over the world are sinking and people create many new artificial land. I think people live with water and they are be careful about water pollution.

Future my image

2006-01-24T16:51:00.000+09:00

this is famous picture "waterfall"

this is my bad future image.
I mean, dosorder, complicated, difficult, unfamiliar, fear, anxiety and so on.

It is very hard to deal with.

Vision of the future

2006-01-24T15:57:00.000+09:00

My vision of the future might be typical.

1. High buildings and floating roads
Using midair will be useful to cover learge population
and their privacy.

2. Fewer natural things
There should be nature in order to sustain the earth,
but it will be completely separated from developed culture.

3. Fewer people outside
People can communicate in the house or somewhere inside
by using high-technology. And they will be also able to
move without so long time.

********

I found the picture near my image, but I'm not sure
how to use "Add Image" bottun...
and my homework to publish my essay on this blog.
Can I publish whole my essay which should be too long
to be posted here??

My image of future

2006-01-24T15:22:00.000+09:00

This is from a page which many patterns of cloths are sold, and this is one of them.
therefore, I am sorry not to know the painter's intention.
When I imagine the future, I always remember the movies "Back to the Future".
In one story of this serious, there is the future, people can ride board which floats. this picture is almost same as my image.
I think the scenery of town will not change too, but we will use some technological machine like that.

HW:My image of the future

2006-01-24T11:49:00.000+09:00

Good afternoon!
My image of the term "future" is these pictures.
Both of them have same title, "L'empire des Lumieres"painted by René Magritte.
In English, "the empire of shine."

I think the future is the sky in this picture. It is very clear, beutiful, shiny, but everyone never gain it as same as dreams.
All of us see the same sky, but each of us have our own image of the sky.
If we forget that the sky is not our own belongings, we lose more important things for us - the light on the ground.
When I adjust to the sun shine, I cannot notice the faint light. So the future is shine for us, but I want to hold my foot dear.

homework : my image of future

2006-01-20T19:57:00.000+09:00

I'm not sure whether this is right place to post the homework...but, anyway, my image of future mostly looks like this picture. The title is "Heidelberg : Sunset", and it was painted by Joseph Mallord William Turner.

As you see, this picture doesn't show a clear landscape. Everything is described in a gauzy mist, so we cannot recognize their exact shapes. Also, there are both brighter place and darker place in colour.

As a whole, I receive a very 'vague' impression from this picture. This is what I feel about the future...

WP document

2006-01-19T14:10:00.000+09:00

I have a question to submit our WP document.
We need to submit both a document (for outline/works cited) & power point. However, we can submit only one document. so is it acceptable to submit as a file which includes 2 document??

May I ask you a question?

2006-01-14T14:22:00.001+09:00

Hello everyone, this is Ayumi. It is very cold today...
By the way, I have one question to ask you about WP( actually about the time).
T think we have 30 minutes each group for WP. How can we devide this?
In SGW, it is written we should take 8~10 minutes for presentation, so normally it seems 10 minutes for each topic ( it means presentation, discussion, activity). But do you think it is OK to use the time as we want to? For example, 15 minutes in presentation, 10 minutes in discussion, 5 minutes in activity?

Happy New Year, from Huwie.

2006-01-08T11:59:00.000+09:00

Sorry my "happy New Year" is
late this year, but I got a bit lost
picking up my Dad from his office!

ESSAY topic

2006-01-08T10:06:00.000+09:00

Hi, this is Mito.

Essay topic: cloning(especially Human cloning related with children)

Essay thesis statement:

This essay will argue about the relationship between children and clone, bioethics of cloning and genetic engineering about children.

WP thesis group5

2006-01-08T10:05:00.000+09:00

Title [Human clone: the gap between fiction & real world]

topic 1) public culture

2) Laws

Thesis: Many people imagined about human clones until now, this WP will compare the human clone in fiction world and in real world.

My Essay topic and thesis

2006-01-07T00:46:00.000+09:00

Hi! This is Kei. My essay topic is same with WP.
Topic: Cloning

Thesis Statement
This essay will argue that cloning has merit and demerit points but people should not clone, especially, human cloning.

It is very difficult to decide should people clone or not but I will argue my opinion.

WP topic and thesis - group 6

2006-01-06T15:58:00.000+09:00

Hi, everyone!
We'd like to introduce our presentation topic & thesis.

Topic
The different attitude toward abortion and euthanasia

Thesis
"Abortion and euthanasia are concerned to same moral issue; controlling life.
However, the former is legal but the latter is not because of influence of many aspects such as religion and culture."