Our group discussion was about Julian Savulescu's "Yuk" entry. The group discussed a main point surrounding the question, "When is it okay to overcome what some people may call a "Yuck factor""? Our basis on this topic was intuition. Some people think about things before they do them and some don't. An example of this would be cannibalism. Some people thought that canibalism was okay, especially when you were trying to survive. Other people thought that cannibalism was uttery wrong and disgusting. When in time do these social things end and begin in a "Yuk factor"? Most of us form a factor of such from our environment. Everyone has their own reasons for doing what they do. Our behaviors are learned and it is up to us to figure out if it is a wrong act or a right act. Another main point that we discussed was Hitler. How could a man kill all Jews and see absolutely nothing wrong with it? Was this a learned behavior or did he go through something in order for this action to carry out. These are things that you think about when you are talking about a "Yuk factor". Always consider what others believe and why they believe this or that. For instance, we believe that killing a child is wrong, but in China if you have too many they kill them with no hesitation. That is just an example of the argument about "Yuk factor". Society has a way of twisting things to make you believe what they want you to, but you have to use your own head and tell what's right and what's wrong.
*Group members - Sorry about the late post, work has officially taken over my life. lol
I really enjoy our group! All of our diverse views and personalities make for really interesting conversation that most of the time turns into debate.
ReplyDeleteWhat I would really like to know is this:
When did the things like Cannibalism, Incest, Skin Color, and Gender really become "Yuk Factors"? Like, what made our brains all of a sudden have a perverse reaction to these things after humans lived like this for so long?
I think by addressing the "Yuk" factor, we as a individuals are able to control our thinking and interpretation of the world in my more justifiable fashion. By simply agreeing with the conventional "Yuk's" of our world we begin to lose what it truly means to have an opinion, and ultimately, what it means to have freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteQuestions:
1) What does Sandel mean by the term "robotic athletes"?
2) As our society becomes more dependent on technology, and the attitudes for biotechnology, do you believe the format of the 'traditional' sport will change entirely? If so, what does that mean for the integrity of sports?
- Malcolm