Reading further in Pinker's work, he suggests that the theory of human nature is based on The Blank Slate, the Noble Savage, and the Ghost in the Machine. He also says that these doctrines have been challenged by the sciences of mind, brain, genes and evolution. These challenges reveal Pinker's thoughts. When discussing the Blank Slate, he brings up an idea that "implied dogmas...could not be treated as self-evident truths that just grew out of the brain, but had to be justified, by experiences." It is the mention of experiences that Pinker elicits some idea that the mind and the body really are needed together. The "togetherness" of the mind and body is also believed by others that say, "man is man because he has no instincts, because everything he is and has become, he has learned, acquired from his culture, from the manmade part of the environment, from other human beings." He suggests that a body is needed in order for experiences to lead to learning.
You might be thinking where does this possibly fit into my life? With the recent stem cell research, it is possible to rid a body of HIV. Finally a cure! But, ethically, will the possibility of curing HIV and potentially AIDs, be a good enough reason to obtain stem cells in any way possible? The largest debate in regards to stem cells regard embryonic stem cells that can be obtained from an embryo. In fact, the debate stems from a Cartesian viewpoint and ultimately, a viewpoint of the Ghost in the Machine, that Pinker analyzes. Many believe that obtaining stem cells is killing a baby, but is all boils down to when you believe the "ensoulment takes play in embryonic development." "I think, therefore I am" comes to mind. No pun intended. Does an embryo become a tiny human when it can "think?" By Descartes's definition to be requires one to think, therefore a mind would need a body. His mind/body dualism seems to rebuke one of his most famous sayings. What do you think would be Descartes's idea about obtaining embryonic stem cells? Does ensoulment time matter?
In my opinion, it all boils down to utilitarianism. A small cluster of cells vs. a disease that afflicts 468,578 people (according to the CDC) should be quite clear which side is right, if you look at it in a utilitarian way. Not to mention all the other diseases and injuries that can be cured with stem cells!
ReplyDeleteBut consider the backlash: women's wombs are viewed as commodities because there is a price placed on their embryos. There is an "incentive" to abortion, and most people want to lower abortion rates, both pro-choicers and pro-lifers.
And this thought is a little out-there, but would a cure for AIDS be denounced by the Pope? Would he say that this cure would cause people to have irresponsible sex? Would he say that - like condoms - the cure flat-out doesn't work? Just a thought.
I also have been thinking about the word 'abortion' as we've gone through this class. I think of how a woman's body sheds cells every month, and that is just a part of the natural process of life. Many, many, many women miscarry their first one or two pregrnancies, sometimes knowing they are pregnant, and sometimes without knowing. Granted, to have an "abortion" you are making a conscious choice to do so, but essentially, it could also be seen as cells that weren't meant to be...(or that could be used in stem cell research in this case). I wonder if abortion had a different name...how would the conversation change. Would it? etc. Oh goodness, what if it were called de-soulment....
ReplyDeleteNot really commenting on the post but just wanted to point out that there are other ways to obtain stem cells rather than directly from the embryo. I'm not sure if there are differences or if one way is better (strictly scientifically speaking) or not though.
ReplyDeleteWomen's wombs being considered commodities is definitely something that stems from the past and is still very much a part of the present. It is interesting that you bring that up because to be honest, its sad but true. Women are still looked at as images of fertility and always have been. Going off of that, so many other questions emerge, like would women get compensated for their embryos? Would conception have a new goal? so on and so on. As far as conversation changing with a new name? I have no idea Julie. I laughed a little thinking about it being called de-soulment. I really do wonder how people would respond. Science vs. Religion vs. the Ghost in the Machine. And Jared, you are correct with stem cells coming from other places! It has even been recently discovered (since you were strictly speaking scientifically I figured I could too) that mature cells can be reprogrammed to the stage of "stem" cells by forcing the expression of some transcription factors. Even with differentiated cells it becomes possible to reprogram them to embryonic development!
ReplyDelete