Genetics & Human Behavior
The world of Genetics is one that is both fascinating and interesting. When tackling how genetics plays a role in behavior, one must look within the scope of what genetics is before dealing with how it plays a significant role in one’s behavior. Simply put, genetics is the study of genes. It is a biological component within the entire study of biology itself. Scientists who study genetics and perform research do so with the intent to learn more about how genetics affects the overall attitudes, behaviors and dispositions of individuals. It could be said that genetics is somewhat of a psychological-biological science as researchers look at the underlying patterns within the genes that cause certain patterns to emerge within the particular group or individual.
One aspect of genetics is human cloning. There is a vast amount of criticism with regard to human cloning; however, there are some benefits to it. The first question that comes to mind with human cloning is why clone in the first place. Scientists have to be able to justify the purpose of human cloning and by doing so it blurs the lines between ethics and morality in proportion with the overall benefits of cloning itself. Two popular justifications of human cloning are utility and autonomy. The former concept deals primarily with the benefits of human cloning while the latter, looks at it from a values/perspectives standpoint.
Some examples of the utility justification are:
“1) By having clones, people can, in some measure, have more of themselves in the world and thereby make a bigger impact.
2) Parents can replace a dying child with a genetically identical new one.
3) Parents can produce a clone of a ...
... middle of paper ...
... Berkeley: Department of Nuclear Engineering website: http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/courses/classes/NE-24%20Olander/Equalitarinism_vs_Hereditarinism.htm
3) Heritability: Introduction [Report/Document]. (2011). Retrieved from University of Colorado at Boulder: Department of Psychology and Neuroscience website: http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/hgss/hgssapplets/heritability/heritability.intro.html
4) Kilner, J. (2002, November 15). Human Cloning. Retrieved from The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity website: http://cbhd.org/content/human-cloning
5) Powell, K. (2010, July 19). Nature vs. Nurture: Are We Really Born That Way? [About.com Guide]. Retrieved from http://genealogy.about.com/cs/geneticgenealogy/a/nature_nurture.htm
6) Wine, J. J. (2000). Genes and Behavior. Cognitive Neuroscience, Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/~wine/202/g-and-b.html
Children grow up watching movies such as Star Wars as well as Gattaca that contain the idea of cloning which usually depicts that society is on the brink of war or something awful is in the midsts but, with todays technology the sci-fi nature of cloning is actually possible. The science of cloning obligates the scientific community to boil the subject down into the basic category of morality pertaining towards cloning both humans as well as animals. While therapeutic cloning does have its moral disagreements towards the use of using the stem cells of humans to medically benefit those with “incomplete” sets of DNA, the benefits of therapeutic cloning outweigh the disagreements indubitably due to the fact that it extends the quality of life for humans.
While both nature and nurture have evidence to support each theory, it is the effects on one another that may be responsible for shaping development. As we move into a new era where it is no longer nature versus nurture, but instead nature and nurture, the study of behavioral epigenetics will become even more important as we begin to recognize the relationship that exists between the two and how they affect one another.
“Cloning represents a very clear, powerful, and immediate example in which we are in danger of turning procreation into manufacture.” (Kass) The concept of cloning continues to evoke debate, raising extensive ethical and moral controversy. As humans delve into the fields of science and technology, cloning, although once considered infeasible, could now become a reality. Although many see this advancement as the perfect solution to our modern dilemmas, from offering a potential cure for cancer, AIDS, and other irremediable diseases, its effects are easily forgotten. Cloning, especially when concerning humans, is not the direction we must pursue in enhancing our lives. It is impossible for us to predict its effects, it exhausts monetary funds, and it harshly abases humanity.
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
...w, the media has framed the cloning debate as an ethical debate and has provided the framework that much of the public views the issue. Among the articles that I reviewed, the main characterization of cloning as an ethical issue centers around two connected worries: the loss of individuality, the motivations behind cloning. In the presentation cloning the media has not always presented an objective view of cloning, but rather has played upon peoples fears about loss of individuality and questionable use of cloning to create uncertainty among the public.
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
A growing controversy in the world today is cloning. One stance is that cloning and cloning research should be banned altogether. Another position is in support of no restrictions of cloning and that scientists should be able to test on animals if they deem it necessary. Many other views are squeezed into different gray areas on the topic. It would be beneficial to explore the methods, benefits, moral and ethical conflicts involved with human cloning to fully understand the pros of cloning. The methods of human cloning and the research that accompanies them can provide a great deal of benefits. The benefits of human cloning include important medical breakthroughs, reproduction, and morality issues.
Steen, R. Grant. DNA and Destiny: Nurture and Nature in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press, 1996.
Sarah Mae Sincero writes in the second paragraph, about how we might be able to pinpoint the genes that are in charge of our sexual preference or criminal behavior once researchers have enough evidence to prove their existence. She takes hold of the audiences attention by appealing to them in a logical way.
In the article that I chose there are two opposing viewpoints on the issue of “Should Human Cloning Ever Be Permitted?” John A. Robertson is an attorney who argues that there are many potential benefits of cloning and that a ban on privately funded cloning research is unjustified and that this type of research should only be regulated. On the flip side of this issue Attorney and medical ethicist George J. Annas argues that cloning devalues people by depriving them of their uniqueness and that a ban should be implemented upon it. Both express valid points and I will critique the articles to better understand their points.
Opponents also maintain that human cloning contribute to the advanced medical science. For example, in America, chemists sold medicine after animal testing but, it did not work well and after taking medicine, deformed children were born. Therefore, for numerous lives, some human cloning’s sacrifice is needed. However, human cloning could not be justified for selfish purposes. For instance, think about that one human clone is born to cure someone’s disease. After the cure, “he will be treated as a freak, set apart from others, the object of tiring scientific and public curiosity, and exposed to unending physical and psychological testing.” (Thomas) In addition, does the human clone’s goal of life disappeared? Who are born for someone in the world? Is there anything like this inhumane act except human cloning?
Human behavior is a loosely defined foundation for individuality, generally considered to be influenced and developed by the environment. However, recent molecular studies have exposed genetic factors that suggest a more biological origin for behavior. Gene segments in the genome of humans and other animals have been identified and associated with particular behavioral traits. Is it possible that the presence or absence of even a single gene may predispose one to alcoholism, increased irritability, or enhanced intelligence? Clearly exploration of the nature versus nurture argument with regard to genetic predisposition has social, political, and legal significance.
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
Human beings are born, formed and changed from one generation to the other through genetics. When a child enters the world, there is always a lot of excitement and uncertainty as which parent will the baby look like? Genes of the both parents determines the physical makeup of a child and therefore, genetics plays a very big role in human development. Genetics chromosomes are distributed equally by the parents to the child and they play a big role in the development of the child. Genes determines the development of a fetus inside its mother’s womb and outside of the mother’s womb.
Genetics is a scientific discipline that deals with how individuals inherit their physical and behavioral attributes. Generally, genetics is a branch of biology that deals with the science of heredity, genes, and differences in living organisms. It’s the process with which a child inherits traits from his/her parents and the molecular organization and function of genes. The question of what determines the development of a child has been an issue that has attracted considerable concerns and debates across educators, biologists, and psychologists. This issue has attracted huge concerns because it’s impossible to explain each and every factor that eventually determines who a child becomes. Notably, the development of a child involves a mix of various influences such as parenting, genetics, individual experiences, family relationships, friends, and school. One of the most important influences on a child’s development and growth is genetics, which primarily is the process of traits inheritance from parents to offspring.