http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/28/business/28clone.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&oref=slogin
As our minds continue to expand, so too does our capacity for scientific inquiry. The very basis on which our “Brave New World” is made possible is such discovery. The only questions to consider in the process of technological development are the ethical implications. When does our quest for ground breaking advancement cross our integrity?
Lori B. Gruen, an associate professor of philosophy at Wesleyan University, notes in the New York Times the growing interest in today’s cloning technology as “cloning grows more efficient and therefore less expensive, and its popularity expands.” Just as the advent of the Model-T in Huxley’s Brave New World captured the attention and sparked excitement of the dystopian society, the beginning of what we are learning about cloning technologies has become an important focus for many.
“Indeed,” continues Gruen, “ethical issues like the treatment of animals used for cloning will need to be addressed systematically.” If such methods were to resemble those of Huxley’s fictional society, this treatment would be comparable to the Bokanovsky process. However, as a result of the level of respect given to the individual, our society recognizes the “legitimate ethical worries that people are expressing,” Gruen said. Furthermore, because of the many ethical dilemmas associated with reproductive cloning, controversy will continue to surround the topic for fear of what society might incur as a result of such practices. To ignore these concerns would either prove to be tremendously brave, in the name of science, or terribly foolish for human civilization.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Friday, May 9, 2008
Shelby's Blog #3
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/28/business/28clone.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&oref=slogin
In a way we ARE living in a brave new world. In Huxley’s, scientific questioning was prohibited, but in ours, it is encouraged. For example, the new industry that centers around the cloning of domesticated pets is taking off. The cloning started with cats, but is moving to dogs. The concerns that people have with cloning relates to John’s concerns with Huxley’s new world’s reproduction process. Lori. B. Gruen states within the article that “ ‘There are legitimate ethical worries that people are expressing about the suffering of animals” (2), just as John expressed his worries about the Bokanovsky process.
Also this article seems to hypothesize that more and more people will desire clones of their pets, just as Huxley’s new world wanted clones of people. The cloning of Ford’s cars took off at a rapid rate, leading to the cloning of people (in Huxley’s novel). What is to say that the cloning of people isn’t far from the cloning of pets? The article even states that “[cloning and it’s] popularity expands” as “[it] grows more efficient and therefore less expensive” (2). It appears that the cloning of humans is not far away.
In a way we ARE living in a brave new world. In Huxley’s, scientific questioning was prohibited, but in ours, it is encouraged. For example, the new industry that centers around the cloning of domesticated pets is taking off. The cloning started with cats, but is moving to dogs. The concerns that people have with cloning relates to John’s concerns with Huxley’s new world’s reproduction process. Lori. B. Gruen states within the article that “ ‘There are legitimate ethical worries that people are expressing about the suffering of animals” (2), just as John expressed his worries about the Bokanovsky process.
Also this article seems to hypothesize that more and more people will desire clones of their pets, just as Huxley’s new world wanted clones of people. The cloning of Ford’s cars took off at a rapid rate, leading to the cloning of people (in Huxley’s novel). What is to say that the cloning of people isn’t far from the cloning of pets? The article even states that “[cloning and it’s] popularity expands” as “[it] grows more efficient and therefore less expensive” (2). It appears that the cloning of humans is not far away.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
mackenzie's post # 2 SATIRE
The overall success of all societies which are governed by religious imperialsm, manipulation of the general population by those in power, and popular cultural practice (which is nearly all of them to some degree) depends on complete solidarity within its community. Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, a parody, demonstrates the reaction made by those in control when not all members of society fall in line with the predestined roles to which society has ascribed them.
When solidarity is tested by individuals whose views are contrary to those of the community’s, “The security and stability of Society are in danger” (149), says Huxley’s D.H.C. in condemning Bernard’s unwillingness to conform. Bernard’s so-called “indecencies” committed against society, as recited by the Director, include “his heretical views on sport and soma, the scandalous unorthodoxy of his sexlife, [and] his refusal to obey the teachings of Our Ford” (149). Huxley’s character, Bernard, single handedly destroys that which society has traditionally held sacred in his comment on the role of those who hold power as suppressers of inherent individual liberties. The D.H.C. regards such expressions of free will as “indecencies,” “heretical,” and “scandalous.”
In terms of the way of life which governs Huxley’s dystopian society, an independent thinker cannot exist. Such an individual would inevitably take on the label of “outcast” in any single, uniform society. Furthermore, the Director goes on to conclude that Bernard, as such a person, may be considered “an enemy of Society, a subverter of all Order and Stability, a conspirator against Civilization itself” (149). Such a strong, seemingly irrational reaction causes the reader to wonder whether or not these cultural values which they can observe in their own lives are really what would be best for not only themselves, but also society as a whole.
When solidarity is tested by individuals whose views are contrary to those of the community’s, “The security and stability of Society are in danger” (149), says Huxley’s D.H.C. in condemning Bernard’s unwillingness to conform. Bernard’s so-called “indecencies” committed against society, as recited by the Director, include “his heretical views on sport and soma, the scandalous unorthodoxy of his sexlife, [and] his refusal to obey the teachings of Our Ford” (149). Huxley’s character, Bernard, single handedly destroys that which society has traditionally held sacred in his comment on the role of those who hold power as suppressers of inherent individual liberties. The D.H.C. regards such expressions of free will as “indecencies,” “heretical,” and “scandalous.”
In terms of the way of life which governs Huxley’s dystopian society, an independent thinker cannot exist. Such an individual would inevitably take on the label of “outcast” in any single, uniform society. Furthermore, the Director goes on to conclude that Bernard, as such a person, may be considered “an enemy of Society, a subverter of all Order and Stability, a conspirator against Civilization itself” (149). Such a strong, seemingly irrational reaction causes the reader to wonder whether or not these cultural values which they can observe in their own lives are really what would be best for not only themselves, but also society as a whole.
Shelby's Post #2
Huxley satirizes the worlds view toward conformity through the Director’s attempt to exile Bernard to Iceland. By pointing out Bernard’s differences from society, such as “his heretical views on sport and soma” and “the scandalous unorthodoxy of his sexlife” (149), and how these differences lead to the disapproval of him as a whole, Huxley points out the way that society tends to exile those who are different from the mainstream. Huxley’s use of the word “unorthodoxy” only intensifies the point that his banning is due to his refusal to conform. By the director calling him “an enemy of Society” due to his nonconformity (149), Huxley portrays how a unique person is ultimately labeled as working against everyone else solely because he chooses to act different. Although in most of the industrialized nations one’s differences don’t lead to as large of a punishment as deportation, it does lead to one being treated as an outcast. Huxley’s exaggeration of the situation (Bernard’s large expulsion due to small actions) pokes fun at the way society takes an extreme disliking and comfort to those different, thus through the use of satire he portrays his point. The fact that Huxley even uses Bernard’s differences as such an important piece of the story paints a picture of dystopia, because his differences are what cause the attempt at a utopia to fail. His acts of independence make the difference between the utopia and the dystopia, and those differences prove that a true utopia cannot exist, for everyone is not the same.
Friday, May 2, 2008
mackenzie's post #1 - The Nature of Change and Human Reaction
Change is exciting. Change is new. Change is beginning. Change is generally structured to better any particular need. The most fundamental need to modern society is society itself. Because we have evolved into a species which depends on his neighbor, we will sacrifice individual desires for the good of the group. Even so, what is good for the group is typically good for its members as well. So, when any kind of change presents itself that may be beneficial to a common group, or a common goal, it will almost immediately have a certain intrigue that, despite possible consequences to its effect, will evoke immense enthusiasm and gain strong influence within a body of people.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World captures the excitement that arises when the D.H.C. (Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning) of a dystopian society announces to a group of students that the “principal of mass production at last applied to biology” (7). In describing the process which would produce “Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines!” (7), Huxley describes the director’s voice as “almost tremulous with enthusiasm” (7). There is no doubt that any form of advancement, particularly technological in this day in age, is bound to interest many and gain a great deal of attention and significance to a society.
The only down side to such advancement is the sacrifice of the individual. With “Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines!” (7), the personal touch quality is lost. The backbone to this change, however, is the “planetary motto,” “Community, Identity, Stability” (7). This slogan is what causes the individual to surrender their rights and, instead, perpetuate the values of society through whatever change it deems necessary.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World captures the excitement that arises when the D.H.C. (Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning) of a dystopian society announces to a group of students that the “principal of mass production at last applied to biology” (7). In describing the process which would produce “Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines!” (7), Huxley describes the director’s voice as “almost tremulous with enthusiasm” (7). There is no doubt that any form of advancement, particularly technological in this day in age, is bound to interest many and gain a great deal of attention and significance to a society.
The only down side to such advancement is the sacrifice of the individual. With “Ninety-six identical twins working ninety-six identical machines!” (7), the personal touch quality is lost. The backbone to this change, however, is the “planetary motto,” “Community, Identity, Stability” (7). This slogan is what causes the individual to surrender their rights and, instead, perpetuate the values of society through whatever change it deems necessary.
Shelby's Post #1
Essential Question Incorporated: What is the nature of change and what is human reaction toward it?
“‘An intensive propaganda against viviparous reproduction … accompanied by a campaign against the Past; by the closing of museums, the blowing up of historical monuments (luckily most of them had already been destroyed during the Nine Years’ War); by the suppression of all books published before A.F. 150.’” (51)
Huxley portrays the nature of change as a series of steps. These steps seem to go in the order of: the introduction of the idea, the battle against the idea, the acceptance of the idea, then the battle against what that idea has replaced (as a way to make that new idea permanent), and finally the period of the new idea ruling (when the idea is no longer seen as ‘new’ or a ‘change’… its accepted as a way of life or fact).
This is how Huxley describes the change from the past world (of mothers and fathers) to the new (of reproductive laboratories and such). With the quote above Huxley is depicting the fourth step of change, which in this case is the battle against the previous way of life (the past world).
At this point in Mond’s reflection on how the past world transformed into the new, he is describing how the population tried to rid of everything from before (museums, books, traditions) in a war-like manner, as Mond describes the civilians actions as “a campaign against the Past” (Huxley 51). The use of the word “campaign” indicates a feeling of battle, as if the population was fighting “against” the old and convincing others to go with the new. These intense feelings during the transition of the world show how strongly some can be affected by it – some even consumed by it.
This period of change can relate to Things Fall Apart, for when the Igbo converted to Christianity they left their past behind (their traditional beliefs and way of life). This is the same as how the people in Brave New World converted their previous way of life into the new, and tried to “campaign” others to follow, just as the Christians did.
Thus change is depicted by Huxley as something that consumes oneself, to the point where he or she tries to convince others to follow.
“‘An intensive propaganda against viviparous reproduction … accompanied by a campaign against the Past; by the closing of museums, the blowing up of historical monuments (luckily most of them had already been destroyed during the Nine Years’ War); by the suppression of all books published before A.F. 150.’” (51)
Huxley portrays the nature of change as a series of steps. These steps seem to go in the order of: the introduction of the idea, the battle against the idea, the acceptance of the idea, then the battle against what that idea has replaced (as a way to make that new idea permanent), and finally the period of the new idea ruling (when the idea is no longer seen as ‘new’ or a ‘change’… its accepted as a way of life or fact).
This is how Huxley describes the change from the past world (of mothers and fathers) to the new (of reproductive laboratories and such). With the quote above Huxley is depicting the fourth step of change, which in this case is the battle against the previous way of life (the past world).
At this point in Mond’s reflection on how the past world transformed into the new, he is describing how the population tried to rid of everything from before (museums, books, traditions) in a war-like manner, as Mond describes the civilians actions as “a campaign against the Past” (Huxley 51). The use of the word “campaign” indicates a feeling of battle, as if the population was fighting “against” the old and convincing others to go with the new. These intense feelings during the transition of the world show how strongly some can be affected by it – some even consumed by it.
This period of change can relate to Things Fall Apart, for when the Igbo converted to Christianity they left their past behind (their traditional beliefs and way of life). This is the same as how the people in Brave New World converted their previous way of life into the new, and tried to “campaign” others to follow, just as the Christians did.
Thus change is depicted by Huxley as something that consumes oneself, to the point where he or she tries to convince others to follow.
Andrew's post -- Human reaction to change
"Sleep teaching was actually prohibited in England. There was something called liberalism. Parliament, if you know what that was, passed a law against it. The records survive. Speeches about liberty of the subject. Liberty to be inefficient and miserable. Freedom to be a round peg fit in a square hole.” (Huxley 46)
This passage highlights the rapid change that occurred in the past (our current) government to form the future utopian community. Drawing from this passage, I believe that little wayward thinking is allowed or takes place in the current community of which they live. Liberalism, practically the epitome of democracy, is mentioned with a distasteful regard. These future people could never imagine to rise into a counterculture or propagate against the government, such an action would surely be punishable by death. The human reaction is therefore silenced and nullified after it has been eliminated so swiftly by the government. In fact, there is little or no reaction actually felt by the population because all those who have had alternate forms of government are dead, so people just don’t know any better.
The right of liberty is also mentioned although it is not referred to as a right, consequently because it simply isn’t in their society. Individual liberty is what democracy is most often founded upon and it is no surprise that it has been dissolved in order to maintain a totalitarian rule.
They also mention freedom, of which is also incredibly limited in their society (as shown by their strict policy on zero leisure time outside of work). Again, a right we take for granted, freedom, parallels democracy in almost every way, thus it has been eliminated like the other “Natural rights” I mentioned above. Holistically, they are deeming creative thinking a rebellious and savage idea, of which only the less- intelligent past humans thrived on. True it may have been “inefficient” compared to their production rates but whether it was miserable or not is in the eyes of the beholder…
This passage highlights the rapid change that occurred in the past (our current) government to form the future utopian community. Drawing from this passage, I believe that little wayward thinking is allowed or takes place in the current community of which they live. Liberalism, practically the epitome of democracy, is mentioned with a distasteful regard. These future people could never imagine to rise into a counterculture or propagate against the government, such an action would surely be punishable by death. The human reaction is therefore silenced and nullified after it has been eliminated so swiftly by the government. In fact, there is little or no reaction actually felt by the population because all those who have had alternate forms of government are dead, so people just don’t know any better.
The right of liberty is also mentioned although it is not referred to as a right, consequently because it simply isn’t in their society. Individual liberty is what democracy is most often founded upon and it is no surprise that it has been dissolved in order to maintain a totalitarian rule.
They also mention freedom, of which is also incredibly limited in their society (as shown by their strict policy on zero leisure time outside of work). Again, a right we take for granted, freedom, parallels democracy in almost every way, thus it has been eliminated like the other “Natural rights” I mentioned above. Holistically, they are deeming creative thinking a rebellious and savage idea, of which only the less- intelligent past humans thrived on. True it may have been “inefficient” compared to their production rates but whether it was miserable or not is in the eyes of the beholder…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)