My paper will discuss the ethical implications of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), especially in food crops.
The idea behind genetically modified crops is that it will end world hunger by increasing yields and deterring pests. In our society, food crops are only considered to have instrumental value, therefore we should be allowed to manipulate them however we like. However, if we truly value crops for their instrumental value, then we should not be developing a monoculture and wiping out biodiversity (and potentially helpful plants). If plants only have instrumental value, how do we explain the connection of farmers to their land? Yes, they have this connection because the land feeds them and they feed the land, but there is something beyond it. There are things we enjoy about agrarian life, but do not have necessary instrumental value. They have intrinsic value. Each plant on its own has value in my opinion. They are miraculous things, self-sufficient in ways we can never be.
In terms of utilitarianism, if the goal of businesses is producing the greatest good for the greatest number, agribusiness has failed. Although GMO varieties can, at times, increase yields, they do not always replace the existing crops in pest resistance, drought resistance, general yield, or overall acclimatization.
And then there are objections from the organic world view. Can we as humans be responsible enough to genetically alter plants? And where is the line between the domestication/breeding and physically altering the genetic code? The conclusion I, and others, have reached is that we do not know the lasting effects of this science. The spread of GM crops should be stopped for the ethics of the actual science behind them as well as the social effects they are having around the globe. Overall, I argue that GM plants are unethical.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Very Interesting topic! If, as you propose, that humans are not responsible enough to genetically alter our crops how do you propose we address our worldwide food troubles (increased food security for growing populations)? Isn't it unethical to let people starve when we have the option of providing them food even though that food might not be 100% “natural”? What about animals and is it okay do it with them? What about some of the benefits of genetically altering our crops, such as enhanced taste and quality, increased nutrients, yields, and improved resistance to disease, pests, and herbicides?
ReplyDeleteYou are arguing that all GM plants are unethical, and you want the crops to grow the way they normally would, but for example, a country like China, where they are 1.3 billion people, 4 times a use, and the usable land is in the neighborhood of 15% of US's rich land, so that's why China has to use GM crops to grow rice faster in order to feed the people in the country. In the extreme, you think letting the plants be who they are and starve the people until they die is a more ethical solution to have because it is more fair to the crops? I bring this up because almost every 3rd world country, the reason why people use GM is exactly what I stated above.
ReplyDeleteHave you considered incorporating the Precautionary Principle into your argument on the utilitarian basis that long-term food safety would be the greatest good for the greatest number?
ReplyDeleteIf GM plants are stopped what effect would this have on other nations struggling to produce food? If GM planets were being developed in a 3rd world country or a country struggling to produce food would GM planets go against the utilitarian point of view in their mind?
ReplyDeleteI like that you brought up the issue of a monoculture. Do we have the responsibility to preserve biodiversity AND feed the world? If so, which obligation should be considered the most important? If, as you argue, plants have intrinsic value just like humans do, where do you propose we draw the line?
ReplyDeleteHave you though about investigating the corporations that are supporting and producing GMOs, such as Monsanto? Also, have you considered the ethics of companies patenting these newly genetically modified seeds and how this effects farmers and they way they conduct their business?
ReplyDeleteThis is really interesting. I like when you said, "In terms of utilitarianism, if the goal of businesses is producing the greatest good for the greatest number, agribusiness has failed." Do you mean to say that perhaps there are different definitions to consider for the "greatest good?" Our country seems to think that the greatest good in terms of food is the most, the biggest, and the quickest foods. What do you suggest the "greatest good" should be? And would your definition of the greatest good still apply well to utilitarianism or would it fall under a different ethical belief? Which one?
ReplyDeleteIs it only farmers that see the crops as having intrinsic value or do all people see crops as having intrinsic value? If the majority of people are not personally attached to crops like farmers are then, by the principle of utility shouldn't GMO's be acceptable?
ReplyDeleteGM plants solve the hunger problems in many developing countries and some people will die if we stop GM crop. Do you know any other ethical ways to solve the hunger problems if we stop GM plants?
ReplyDeleteI don't fully understand the negatives of the GM plants? How would the GM plants wipe out bio diversity of plants? Is it possible the plants have both instrumental and intrinsic value? You say plants are self-sufficient, but aren't humans the ones that plant them in the first place?
ReplyDeleteDo you think that GM plants could lead to the eventual extinction of the wild types of plants from which they came? If so, we are doing the environment as well as humankind a great disservice because if we no longer continue to raise crops in their natural environment with their original genetic traits, then the entire ecosystems that we are changing by modifying these plants/crops could easily topple over. If this were to happen, humankind could easily end in the long run? Also, could the consumption of GM crops for extended periods of time eventually change the human diet so drastically, after hundreds of thousands of years of evolution that we could no longer eat organic foods and if something were to go terribly wrong in the modification process, that there could be famine everywhere?
ReplyDeleteHow would you argue with a utilitarian that says all things have intrinsic value, but humans more so than plants and by using these GM crops, we are saving more things of intrinsic value which makes it okay?
ReplyDelete