RLS – NSA Edward Snowden scandal
KQ: To what extent does possessing knowledge carry with it an ethical responsibility to act?
P1: Ethical responsibility to act is more when more ppl are affected when not acted upon.
C1:It is an ethical duty to share the knowledge we acquire for the larger benefit of the society
Consumer protection rights, human cloning
CC1: The knowledge presented must not be shared with one and all as it may cause more harm than good
Einstein’s atomic bomb
P2: One can never be sure that he or she possesses enough knowledge
C2: Partial knowledge means that we shouldn’t/don’t need to act
CC2: Given the ongoing nature of scientific enquiry it would mean that we would never act
P3: when the outcome is pragmatic there is an ethical responsibility to act always
C3: self interest v altruism focus pannu
CC3: falsifying data in simple science exp( morally incorrect ,ethically correct)
In the 21st century, it is unconscionable that any human being on the planet should go hungry, especially given our advanced technical capability to assist in producing food with minimal human labour input. One of the largest problems in the market, with respect to food, is the centralized nature of production and the costly expense of distribution, as evidenced by rising food prices that parallel rising gas prices. As such the RLS for my presentation today is the issue of poverty.
From the video, the KQ that I have extracted is to what extent does possessing knowledge carry with it an ethical responsibility to act. So how is the RLS connected to this KQ? The relevance is that the knowledge of poverty was communicated to the people through the Millennium Development goals of UN so that the world would become a better place. Therefore, I feel that the connection between having knowledge and having an ethical responsibility to act upon it is quite clear here.
Let me first deconstruct the KQ. I found that the concept of possessing was compelling to look at. I looked at it in terms of different areas of knowledge. For example, a musician or an artist will have a different and rather personal knowledge base about the meaning behind that art or music. However if we look into natural or human sciences, it is more of a provisional understanding. They know one thing for sure: they don’t really know anything. The fact the truth is evolving, ongoing at no point can one be sure that something is completely proven because we can only support the evidence for some truth. Hence, it is provisional, ongoing. Next, mathematics is far more concrete and universal. The concept of 1=1, 1+1=2
The first perspective I will be looking at is the idea of how we can never be sure if we possess enough knowledge. Is it therefore reasonable to say that those ppl who no more should do more. Or on the contrary, if we only have a little bit of knowledge do we only have to act a little. So does partial knowledge =partial action. But from the sciences we can never get enough knowledge from one space so we never completely act. This is because as I said before science is always ongoing and is never fixed. Looking back the issue of poverty, does this perspective mean that since say I am unaware that poverty is such a serious and prevalent issue, does it mean that I am not as liable as someone who is more well-versed in the issue say sociologists?
Another way of looking at this KQ is through a second perspective whereby the following statement is put forward. Ethical responsibility to act is more when more people are affected when not acted upon. The claim is that each and every one of us have an ethical duty to share the knowledge we acquire for the larger benefit of the society. Let me give you 2 examples. The first being consumer protection rights. Those that possess knowledge in business transactions carry an ethical responsibility to share the knowledge they possess with the consumer whether it be positive or negative because the producer knows more about the product he has manufactured than the consumer Moreover, consuming some goods without full information or goods that aren’t produced to proper standards can cause serious harm to consumers. The second example is human cloning. Cloning techniques are as safe and reliable as other comparable medical procedures, not only does it give parents with diseases a chance to produce healthy children but also provides infertile couples an opportunity to have children of their own. Therefore, it is important that doctors inform patients about this procedure. Hence these examples show how by sharing knowledge we are bringing benefit to a large group of people so we should share the knowledge.