Blog 5
How did the second contemporary issue effect your principles? Are you better able to see areas where your principles need adjusting? What adjustments need to be made? Which philosopher's position was least consistent with your own principles and why?
This topic actually did affect my principles. I am against abortion when it is used as a method of birth control and I do believe that an unborn fetus has the same rights as a the women that has the choice to abort the child. I do see the points that Warren makes about the fetus being dependent on the mother but that does not remove all rights from the child to have life. You can give the child up for adoption to a couple being gay or straight that can not have a child and would be more than happy to raise that child. I think that abortion should be the last option no the first. But at the same time I feel that the government should not force women into having a child that they do not want. The option should always be there even I disagree with it.
Warren position was lease consistent with my principles I think that she is taking value away from human life that is in the making and is only saying we are humans once we are born. But she is forgetting that we were all fetus' at one point which and it was not through birth that we became human but through at the time we are conceived. I think that her views are very extreme and do not give the fetus any right. I think that she does not value life at all and the woman's choice whether she this life or she is forgetting that which in that woman's womb is life the greatest gift that we can ever have and it should looked at closer than just a choice.
i commented on : http://lovelydreamer01.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5.html#comment-form
and http://evonsommerville.blogspot.com/2012/04/my-blog-5.html#comment-form
Ilsa
Monday, April 30, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Blog 4
How did the first contemporary issue effect your principles? Did it challenge them? Were your principles helpful in working out your response to the issue? Which philosopher's position was most consistent with your own principles and why?
The first part of the blog is hard to answer because I never had asked myself what I though in regards in human cloning and even now after thinking about it I dont think that human goes against my principles my I do think that is merely ego driven and has no really useful purpose some people might say oh, but I would want to use thier organs in case I need them. Well, that sentence alone shows the value you have to another human life. To me personally cloning is very much like having children and they like ur clone should not be treated as property just because the are a part of you.
It challenged my principles in the sense that I that believe that cloning is breaking up or playing with the natural way of us humans to procreate. We also need to find a way to make things faster, bigger, better. These are only better to me when they are used for spiritual growth and relieve pain and illness these ambitions are directed toward the wrong target.
I agrees with Kass' principal extermination of genetic disease would be the only benefit to me for cloning but this alone does not justify the long term effects it could on the clone themselves and the effects it could on humanity. We would not need the opposite sex. Family structure could become extinct, leading to problems that we would not know how to handle. If children that come from single parent homes struggle more imagine coming from a single parent home and being a clone. How we would be equipped to counsel or guide those children if you are not a clone yourself, we could never fully understand.
Kass's was more consistent with my principles. I believe that having children naturally and trying to conserve the little structure and value society puts on family today should be bigger goal than trying to have copies of ourselves all over the world.
I commented on
http://lukedemuro.blogspot.com and http://bunchoblogs.blogspot.com
How did the first contemporary issue effect your principles? Did it challenge them? Were your principles helpful in working out your response to the issue? Which philosopher's position was most consistent with your own principles and why?
The first part of the blog is hard to answer because I never had asked myself what I though in regards in human cloning and even now after thinking about it I dont think that human goes against my principles my I do think that is merely ego driven and has no really useful purpose some people might say oh, but I would want to use thier organs in case I need them. Well, that sentence alone shows the value you have to another human life. To me personally cloning is very much like having children and they like ur clone should not be treated as property just because the are a part of you.
It challenged my principles in the sense that I that believe that cloning is breaking up or playing with the natural way of us humans to procreate. We also need to find a way to make things faster, bigger, better. These are only better to me when they are used for spiritual growth and relieve pain and illness these ambitions are directed toward the wrong target.
I agrees with Kass' principal extermination of genetic disease would be the only benefit to me for cloning but this alone does not justify the long term effects it could on the clone themselves and the effects it could on humanity. We would not need the opposite sex. Family structure could become extinct, leading to problems that we would not know how to handle. If children that come from single parent homes struggle more imagine coming from a single parent home and being a clone. How we would be equipped to counsel or guide those children if you are not a clone yourself, we could never fully understand.
Kass's was more consistent with my principles. I believe that having children naturally and trying to conserve the little structure and value society puts on family today should be bigger goal than trying to have copies of ourselves all over the world.
I commented on
http://lukedemuro.blogspot.com and http://bunchoblogs.blogspot.com
Monday, March 5, 2012
Blog 3 - What Social / Moral Principles do you find compelling and why? How do these principles fit with the personal principles you identified in Blog 2? Do they conflict at all? Do you think you can live according to both? How will you go about doing so? i.e. Prioritize them? Adopt specific ones for specific contexts?
I liked Existentialism because it makes the person responsible of their own growth and helps them take responsibility for such growth without having room to blames external factors. I believe that it helps us take a better look at what we are doing to make our life better and how we impact the world not the other way around.
In blog 2 I said that I have learned the most from my own experiences and that they have shaped and guided my life. I take honor in not looking at what society is doing to make my choices in life but to do what I feel is the right thing to do not always the most comfortable or what other would like to do or be. Overall I do not believe that they necessarily conflict but it is difficult to be your own person and to go by what you should do and not what you want to do all the time. It is hard to take personal responsibility and to go through with it.
I think that I can live according to both to me they are more alike than they are opposites. I think that I can live by these principles by always remembering what I stand for and not going by what others want, not blaming or worrying about what others do or don't do and taking responsibility for what I do. I would prioritize them by looking at my life and seeing how I have let society, religion or any other influence shape my life.
I commented on http://dallaslrsmith.blogspot.com
and http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/
I commented on http://dallaslrsmith.blogspot.com
and http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Blog 2
Blog 2 - What personal principles did you adhere to before entering this course and where did they come from? Were they taught to you? Did you develop them on your own? How have our readings and discussions impacted those principles? Of the principles covered which are you drawn to the most and why?
l believe that some of my principles are that I believe in God as the highest power on earth. And when I say God I dont mean a white man with a beard that religions have drawn for us. God could be the universe encompassing nature and all that it offers. I believe that there is a bigger force that wants us to improve and wants us to truly be happy and not let the images and physical things control, define or tell us who we are to be.
I got these beliefs from my own life experience till now. To be honest with you I have learned what not to be like from my family that has been their biggest contribution to my life. Life itself has been and continues to be my teacher. I like to believe that God teaches us through our life experiences which for me has been the beat way not through others but by doing it myself even when I dont want that experience I know that it happened because it needs to teach me something, that I must find out learn and move on.
Our readings have confirmed that most of things I feel are right like there is a higher power and that we learn from it, also that all this material shit that people go crazy for is just that. Useful crap like tv (most of it), celebrities, and things that keep you from becoming and doing what are meant to be doing... like grow. Aside form confirmation they have also inspired to question. Question myself, my established beliefs, in some cases making them stronger and in others helping me seek for more answers and knowledge of the known and unknown.
The principle that I am drawn to the most is the Taoist principle. To I just get it and it sits well inside. It was very pure and human to me, something that I think our technology and society are working on killing the humanness of us. Everything now has to be bigger, faster, you "need" to have this NOW, you "need" this to be happy, there ten more people better ten you so you need take them down to get what want, life is hard, and so on. This principle is against all that and that what I love about it. It will make any human much stronger then what they are at the present moment.
I commented on :
I commented on :
http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)