Up@dawn 2.0

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Case 25- Group 1

[Komron MacLean]
I felt that Mcgee probably wrote this case while sitting in bed reflecting on his day and simply jotting down thoughts in an incoherant manner and calling it a case. Nevertheless, from what we (Group 1) could muster, Mcgee is conflicted about where funds for nanotechnology research should be allocated, how much should be spent and who would best spend it. For guy who claims not to have a firm grasp on what nanotech even is, he sure did have a lot to say about it. He seems to believe too much is allocated for ELSI in nanotech. Consolidating all the ELSI nanotechc research under one roof would be efficient but would it provide for the most diverse platform on which to build nanotech. Would we see progress as quickly if one institution handled everything with limited input from other sources?


  1. This case was also very hard for me to read too. It felt like he had a lot of conflicting feelings, and didn't make any clear statements about what exactly he thought. He was very "foggy." Or made my thoughts foggy because he went around in circles.
    This link shed a little more light on the subject.

  2. ELSI, and all research for that matter, is great, but an issue with placing all of the research for a particular subject under one roof is that we would have to sure that the research being conducted is not solely for the gain of the company funding the research. I hated this case. It was like McGee simply placed his notes from his bed side into a word document.

  3. I'm going to be honest McGee lost me on this case. I'm not sure if he was condemning or sympathizing with current bioethicist. Not much to say about this one, usually I have something to say but this time I don't.