1. What are the key perspectives on the debate that you are studying?
There are two main perspectives for the designer baby debate. First, there are those that are for designer babies and promoting any technology that helps make them a reality. Then, there are those that are against the idea of designer babies and don't want to promote the technology that could possibly make them feasible.
2. What are the major disagreements among these perspectives?
The side that is against designer babies argues that it is immoral to select traits in your child and that you are "playing God." Also, there are many risks involved in gene editing that could have evolutionary consequences and lastly, only the wealthy class can afford this advantage. The side that supports designer babies focuses on the opportunities in treating disease especially genetically inherited ones. The medicinal potential with this technology is huge.
3. What are the possible points of agreement or common ground between the two perspectives?
The two perspectives agree that there is still a lot to research and finalize about gene editing. Some people are just more eager to advance and promote this research than others. The supporters have so acknowledge some of the risks and those against have to consider the possibilities.
4. What are the ideological differences between the perspectives?
More progressive thinkers are more likely to take sides with the perspective that supports designer babies, and the more conservative type people are more likely to takes sides with the perspective that opposes designer babies.
5. What specific actions do their perspectives or texts ask their audience to take?
Calls to action on the side against designer babies include not supporting legislation that will help promote research of gene editing and overall speak against the topic in public settings. Calls to action on the side supporting designer babies follows similarly, support legislation that will help continue and progress research of gene editing and educate others to have similar beliefs. Some take a neutral stance and say to overall be educated on both sides and let the facts sway and persuade the public.
6. What perspective are useful in supporting your own argument about he issue? Why did you choose these?
Perspectives that are against the designer baby issue are going to be more useful in supporting my issue. This is especially true for ones that focus on the affordability of the technology (or lack there of) and the risks like evolutionary consequences. Also, I believe that this technology will start off being used for good reasons like supporting medical discoveries but in the end will be abused for the wrong reasons like parents designing the "perfect' child.
7. What perspectives do you think will be the biggest threat to your argument, why?
The biggest threat to my argument is the possibility of curing diseases that the technology behind designer babies offer. As a person passionate about science research and curing diseases, this is hard for me to go against also. I just think there are safer ways to go about finding cures, and if it means waiting and decades more of research, I think that is what it best to protect humanity.
 |
| Hagen, Hans. "ConTeXt." 24 May 2015 via Wikipedia. Creative Commons. |
Reflection:
I read Jenny and Clay's posts on analyzing context. Jenny approached the context focusing more on the groups involved in the debate. I should look more into the context of the main organizations and people speaking for and against designer babies. Clay's context was very straight forward, but lacked some detail in analyzing the context that both Jenny and I had. Overall, I think I did a good job analyzing the perspectives that surround the designer baby debate and I have narrowed in on a topic to argue that is new and different.
You have a lot of good contextual information here, which says that you know a lot about your topic! I like how you included three perspectives or stances that groups take: either against it, for it or neutral. Also, I like how you are going to be focusing on the economic side of this controversy. However, I want to know who the groups that are involved in this debate are. Are they researchers? College students? Parents? I think this clarification would be beneficial to add.
ReplyDeleteThe depth with which you addressed the different perspectives and why they would be useful or contrary to your argument was really great! I think that you chose the more unvoiced side for your argument, yes? So did I, and I think that this will be an interesting position to take as there are a lot of obstacles from the opposing position to face. In the end, I think that our perspectives will create more compelling and rhetorically interesting pieces :)
ReplyDeleteWow, your responses were very detailed. This will be very helpful for you as you move forward in the project. I really enjoyed how clear you were when you talked about the points of agreement and disagreement.
ReplyDelete