Difference between revisions of "Team:HebrewU/Ethics"
| Line 131: | Line 131: | ||
| − | + | <p class="ahuji"> | |
| Line 175: | Line 175: | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| − | + | </p> | |
</body> | </body> | ||
</html> | </html> | ||
Revision as of 13:40, 8 September 2018
Ethics
Israel is full of religions. Just on our team, you can find 4 different beliefs. This year, we decided to explore how different religions and none religious perspectives sees the use of genetic engineering. In order to do that, we interviewed representatives from each perspective.
Genetic engineering and Judahism.
Lean more.
Atheism and Genetic Engineering - An interview with Dr. Yair Rezek
About Yair:
Yair Rezek holds a PhD degree in physics, an active member in Israeli atheist association named "Hofesh". He is also a representitive of Israeli political party named which advocates for principles of humanism, freedom, and equality.
How does atheism see Genetic Engineering in general?
The majority of Atheists see themselves as part of the enlighten movement which started as part of the scientific revolution. The movement is in favor of any type of technological development (and genetic engineering in particular) that will benefit humanity. With that, like many other technologies Genetic engineering has the potential to give rise to harmful results and we should use it carefully.
Don't you think that advocating for any type of technological advancement can, in potential, lead humanity to chatostrophy?
It is tempting to see my approach in that way, but I think it is too pessimistic. For example, in relation to the use of atomic bombs, humanity managed to stop the development in that direction. In our days, humanity even repress technology too much, like in the context of nuclear energy. I thinkgenetic engineering technology impairs potentially damaging processes as it engulfs economic viability. Still, I think the benefits that we could have from this type of technology is plenty. I think that if you decide for example, to stop developing this technology, someone else will do it in a way that you cannot control. That's why you should still engage with this technology in a careful way.
What is the potentially damaging processes as a byproduct of genetic engineering development?
The use of one good crop with specific genetic attributes can be devastating when it is found to be sensitive to a certain disease or pests. Also, being economic viable, it can benefit to the rise of giant monopolies in the food industry which I oppose to.
Do you support the use of genetic engineering for the production of food and medicine and for solving environmental issues? In each of the fields that you mentioned, there are different safety guidelines that should guide us through the development of new applications to the technology. For example, In agriculture we should pay attention to the fact that some solution will give rise for ecological problems. For example, the disposal of genetic engineered plants can lead to an harmful effect on the environment. We should test this kind of solutions in the highest standards before take in count the unintended consequences of our proposed solutions before using them in practice. As for medicine, there are known regulation concerning approval of each treatment. It becomes more complex when posing the idea of trans-humanism. Hypothetically speaking, genetic improvements in human skills of one class can lead to a class division. How do you think our society should regulate the use of this technology? It's important to teach the people who are engaged in synthetic biology field topics like ethics and ecology and order to create diverse poll of experts who can give rise to diverse opinions when coming to deal with it as society. In the process of regulation, we must have biologist that can enlight misconceptions in the public opinion. When making regulations, we should seek for a balance between effectiveness and allowances so we wouldn't stop the development of the field.
The majority of Atheists see themselves as part of the enlighten movement which started as part of the scientific revolution. The movement is in favor of any type of technological development (and genetic engineering in particular) that will benefit humanity. With that, like many other technologies Genetic engineering has the potential to give rise to harmful results and we should use it carefully.
Don't you think that advocating for any type of technological advancement can, in potential, lead humanity to chatostrophy?
It is tempting to see my approach in that way, but I think it is too pessimistic. For example, in relation to the use of atomic bombs, humanity managed to stop the development in that direction. In our days, humanity even repress technology too much, like in the context of nuclear energy. I thinkgenetic engineering technology impairs potentially damaging processes as it engulfs economic viability. Still, I think the benefits that we could have from this type of technology is plenty. I think that if you decide for example, to stop developing this technology, someone else will do it in a way that you cannot control. That's why you should still engage with this technology in a careful way.
What is the potentially damaging processes as a byproduct of genetic engineering development?
The use of one good crop with specific genetic attributes can be devastating when it is found to be sensitive to a certain disease or pests. Also, being economic viable, it can benefit to the rise of giant monopolies in the food industry which I oppose to.
Do you support the use of genetic engineering for the production of food and medicine and for solving environmental issues? In each of the fields that you mentioned, there are different safety guidelines that should guide us through the development of new applications to the technology. For example, In agriculture we should pay attention to the fact that some solution will give rise for ecological problems. For example, the disposal of genetic engineered plants can lead to an harmful effect on the environment. We should test this kind of solutions in the highest standards before take in count the unintended consequences of our proposed solutions before using them in practice. As for medicine, there are known regulation concerning approval of each treatment. It becomes more complex when posing the idea of trans-humanism. Hypothetically speaking, genetic improvements in human skills of one class can lead to a class division. How do you think our society should regulate the use of this technology? It's important to teach the people who are engaged in synthetic biology field topics like ethics and ecology and order to create diverse poll of experts who can give rise to diverse opinions when coming to deal with it as society. In the process of regulation, we must have biologist that can enlight misconceptions in the public opinion. When making regulations, we should seek for a balance between effectiveness and allowances so we wouldn't stop the development of the field.