gmorua Posted November 11, 2002 Share Posted November 11, 2002 #69 Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development. R/ Despite the great contributions that science has given to humanity through all its fields, scientific organizations should be restricted and controled over some of their research and developments. For example, in the past recent years, cloning embryos has been a great controversy all over the world. Diputes in favor of limitless research over this issue have been defended by bio-genetic scientists, on the contrary, ethical and moral organizations hold conservative positions against the same issues. First, the controversy appears when the issue about cloning embryos is on the table, and furthermore, it is less accepted when the idea of designing and manufacturing children comes out. Cloning human children would involve using human beings as experimentation that has already been performed with animals, and this suggests that a huge percentage of deformed fetuses and severely impaired viable child would result. Moreover, cloning children might encourage some parents to see their children as a function of their delibarate choice and will, instead of a gift from a man and a women freely given to each other in love, which might finally result in a children with a sense of unique identity and individuality. Thus, when scientific experimentation brings out possible risks to humanity, governments should restrict such research and development. On the other hand, scientists defend the subject of cloning embryos by stating that cloning for biomedical research would result in a great variety of treatments for people with some kind of degenerative disease. Scientists refute the conservative idea that cloned nascent humans like early embryos should be treated as human beings, they state that human embryos, only when they are permitted to follow the natural course, grow into humans, otherwise, they have not developed either their respective organs or nervous system, which makes them neither perceptive to stimulation nor subject of suffering. They argue that cloned human embryos are not deserving of more respect than any other human cells, and therefore, they have to be treated like any other microscopic particle without restrictions. Again, conservatives hold their position, and state that since science will not produce data on when the human soul appears in embryos, because this is a metaphysical question which not involve scientific experimentation, those who believe in human embryos as simple egg cells are definitely sacrifying human life, and consequently, any form of human embryo who is coming to be human being, deserves the same respect and has the same rights than that of the fully developed human. Consequently, government should definitely restrict such type of scientific research. In sum, while scientist do not prove that cloning for biomedical purposes is neither dangerous nor unmoral for humanity as conservatives state, and also, prove that cloning for these purposes will definitely incurr in great progress to medical treatments, then, scientific research in this area should be restricted and controled. On the other hand, cloning to produce children is clearly established that must be restricted at all, without any type of consideration to be discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xaero Posted November 11, 2002 Share Posted November 11, 2002 Hi, Apart from the typos, frankly, this would make a great essay on cloning and its problems ;) . You seem to have been led away on elaborating on cloning and have not returned back to address the topic at all. Examples do make an important part of an essay, but addressing the topic given is more important. I'd suggest you to write more on the subject and introduce examples in between, in not more than 2-3 lines. Also, try not to concentrate on just one example. If possible, 2 or more instances would make your essay great. Also, the paragraph First, the controversy appears when the issue about cloning embryos is on the table, and furthermore, it is less accepted when the idea of designing and manufacturing children comes out. Cloning human children would involve using human beings as experimentation that has already been performed with animals, and this suggests that a huge percentage of deformed fetuses and severely impaired viable child would result. Moreover, cloning children might encourage some parents to see their children as a function of their delibarate choice and will, instead of a gift from a man and a women freely given to each other in love, which might finally result in a children with a sense of unique identity and individuality. Thus, when scientific experimentation brings out possible risks to humanity, governments should restrict such research and development. seems to be unclear as to what you're trying to convey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmorua Posted November 11, 2002 Author Share Posted November 11, 2002 Hi, Xaero !!! I appreciate all your comments, and yes !!! I was fearing about your point. I do not know when it was that I "fell in love" with my topic of cloning embryos, and reflected the real topic. Do not you think there is a way (if some changes will make, maybe in the conclusion or any other paragraph..) to pull the essay toward the real topic ???? Again, thanks for your comments, I really appreciate it. gmorua. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xaero Posted November 12, 2002 Share Posted November 12, 2002 Hi gmorua, Its good that you could realize your deviation from the topic while trying to explain your example. As for pulling the essay back on track, I think that could be a bit tough in this case, as your essay looks well over 500 words in length and bringing it back to the topic could take another 300 words atleast. So I suggest you to shorten your examples to about 2-3 or 4 lines max, so that you can finish well within the 45 minute mark. Usually an essay of 500-600 words totally should suffice. HTH, Xaero, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sow1225 Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Hi this is how I interpreted this topic. Please take a look and let me know what you think. Thanks!. Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development" Scientific research and development is very crucial for any country’s advancement in technology. However, depending on the research, the government does need to place few restrictions. The chief reason to support my view is, sponsoring funds for research and development programs are considered to be big investments by any country in the world as such programs help the country to progress in the technology advancement. But, such investments are vulnerable to misusage of funds carried by many people. For instance, it is likely that people may misuse of such huge amounts once they are allotted. They might try to survive in their jobs by showing some progress, but may not contain any beneficial results. Additionally, they may make use of those funds for their personal reasons. Therefore, government of any country, which invests huge amounts in such programs, should try to place restrictions to cut down misusage by the people. Another reason is, a research program gives every crucial information that is needed for a country’s technological advancement. But, if the information is leading nowhere it could be waste of resources for any country. For example, a country with poor economy can only invest in research programs, which can show positive results, which can be beneficial and accessible for people’s use. If the nature of the result is not known, they might get back from investing in such programs. Governments of such countries should place many restrictions on the programs, so that revenues of the country could be saved for immediate emergencies. Others might point out that, research programs of any kind should be sponsored and should be given enough funds because they go a long way in a country’s development in creating scientific era. It is true that, such programs do give out enough information for the development. But, some programs could be repetitive. Additionally, Some may not be necessary for that country. For example, many countries think that nuclear bombs are necessary to defend themselves from any serious emergencies. Such countries go out of the way, even if the economic conditions do not permit, they try to develop the bombs placing no restrictions on such programs. Some countries think it is not necessary to develop any bombs as they think that their nation is free from threats. Such governments do place complete restrictions on the development programs. In sum, I concur to the point that, research programs are very beneficial for a country’s scientific advancement. But, the government should place few restrictions on the research and development programs depending on the research done for a country’s welfare, so that it is not detrimental for the people in the country and for the country’s revenues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sow1225 Posted December 9, 2002 Share Posted December 9, 2002 Hi this is how I interpreted this topic. Please take a look and let me know what you think. Thanks!. Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development" Scientific research and development is very crucial for any country’s advancement in technology. However, depending on the research, the government does need to place few restrictions. The chief reason to support my view is, sponsoring funds for research and development programs are considered to be big investments by any country in the world as such programs help the country to progress in the technology advancement. But, such investments are vulnerable to misusage of funds carried by many people. For instance, it is likely that people may misuse of such huge amounts once they are allotted. They might try to survive in their jobs by showing some progress, but may not contain any beneficial results. Additionally, they may make use of those funds for their personal reasons. Therefore, government of any country, which invests huge amounts in such programs, should try to place restrictions to cut down misusage by the people. Another reason is, a research program gives every crucial information that is needed for a country’s technological advancement. But, if the information is leading nowhere it could be waste of resources for any country. For example, a country with poor economy can only invest in research programs, which can show positive results, which can be beneficial and accessible for people’s use. If the nature of the result is not known, they might get back from investing in such programs. Governments of such countries should place many restrictions on the programs, so that revenues of the country could be saved for immediate emergencies. Others might point out that, research programs of any kind should be sponsored and should be given enough funds because they go a long way in a country’s development in creating scientific era. It is true that, such programs do give out enough information for the development. But, some programs could be repetitive. Additionally, Some may not be necessary for that country. For example, many countries think that nuclear bombs are necessary to defend themselves from any serious emergencies. Such countries go out of the way, even if the economic conditions do not permit, they try to develop the bombs placing no restrictions on such programs. Some countries think it is not necessary to develop any bombs as they think that their nation is free from threats. Such governments do place complete restrictions on the development programs. In sum, I concur to the point that, research programs are very beneficial for a country’s scientific advancement. But, the government should place few restrictions on the research and development programs depending on the research done for a country’s welfare, so that it is not detrimental for the people in the country and for the country’s revenues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsoonhui Posted May 11, 2003 Share Posted May 11, 2003 69 Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development. Recently there are debates on whether government should place restrictions on scientific research and development. Some believe that government should not meddle scientific affairs for fear that it will impede the growth of human knowledge. Others are concern with the threatening aspect of scientific research and express hope that government will set some guidelines and even restrict scientific research if necessary. I argue why government should not place any restriction at all on scientific research. Throughout the human history, humans are fascinated by the wonder of universe. We long to understand our surroundings and ourselves. It is out of curiosity that scientific research is conducted. Since new idea will indubitably challenge the contemporary dogma, we have seen the grim facts that scientists were killed; books were banned so that the dogmatic tenet would survive. Church had in the past tried to hinder new scientific theories like Copernicus' sun-centred model, hoping that these theories would be interred. At the end it is the opposition of new scientific development that is being put to shame. History shows that scientific development is simply unimpedable. This was true yesterday, and it is true today and will remain a truth tomorrow. By placing restriction on scientific research government is making the same mistake as the church made in past hundred years. There is no way scientific development can be squelched. So what is the point for government to incarcerate scientific inquiries? Some say that cloning is evil and it is so portent to our society that government should prohibit it. Even if government sets laws banning the study of human cloning, what will happen? Some scientists, properly motivated or otherwise, will still carry on with their study and in the end cloning human will still become inevitable. It is better for government to study the impact the human cloning and erecting proper law to handle this challenge instead of trying to restrict scientific learning. Philistine believes that government should restrict "impractical" science; they believe that it is a waste of money to study things that have no potential for immediate application. This is simply wrong. The subject that is considered impractical may one day turn out to have enormous relevant to our life. Take for example, number theory in mathematics. Number theory has long been considered as a 'dry', 'useless', and 'theoretical'. Now security encryption is actually applying the number theory stuff. One can imagine that if number theory is underdeveloped, the security of websites, companies will be affected as well since all the encryption software require deep knowledge in number theory. Another example is Quantum Mechanics. When Quantum Mechanics was still in its nascent form nobody would have thought that would revolutionize our technological world. Quantum Mechanics found it's application in semiconductor, and semiconductor is the key in creating computer. If government at that time choose to discourage the study of "impractical" science, our life will be very much different. It is detrimental for government to restrict scientific research. Thus government should encourage scientific research since our world is very much shaped by what we know. Our species need scientific knowledge in order for us to survive, and government should not take away our right to just that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsoonhui Posted May 11, 2003 Share Posted May 11, 2003 I hope someone will be kind enough to review my essay. I have posted three essays and no one seems to be interested:(:o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.