Up@dawn 2.0

Thursday, April 3, 2014

Group 1, Class Discussion- HE 1+2

After discussing Dr. O's daily post, we delved into a discussion on the Harm Principle. Kat wanted to try to set boundaries on what constitutes harm and where blame should and shouldn't be placed, especially when you enter the public. This led to a brief talk about law enforcement and why the police do what they do (generally, they're just doing their job). We then went around the room to ascertain others' opinions on the Harm Principle. Meredith said she was uncomfortable with others controlling what she did or, for example, what she ate. Evan believes that even when you give people more information based on what they consume, it's unlikely to drastically affect their decisions.

The conversation revolved around food portion control for awhile with a lot of us uncomfortable with the idea of them being controlled for us. We also discussed a paradox of healthy eating for a good while (foods that are better for you cost more money).


  1. FYI-
    I see that food guru Michael Pollan is coming to Nashville May 15, hosted by Parnassus Books. Always an engaging and informative speaker.

  2. (FQ) T/F: According to Agar, by engineering particular traits in embryos, we can control the path that the human with those traits will take.
    False (p. 33)

    (FQ) The ideas of which fictional character are used to describe the idea of positional goods, in which the efforts of enhancing children will be "futile" because everyone is improving their children?
    The Red Queen (p. 40)

    (FQ) T/F: Buchanan argues against genetic engineering, claiming that it will be detrimental to the development of our society.
    False (p. 44)

    (DQ) What sort of situations are there in which we might feel obligated to genetically modify our potential offspring?

    Link: http://www.actionbioscience.org/biotechnology/glenn.html

  3. FQ:
    DQ: Should those with genetic problems be allowed to alter offspring? Or conversely, should someone with a genetic problem be allowed to purposefully pass on a genetic problem (ie deafness).