Compare Foxs The Case for Animal Experimentation vs Darnovskys Revisi

Fox's The Case for Animal Experimentation Chapter 2 and 3 and Darnovsky's "Revisiting Sex Selection" 1. What is the challenge/problem presented in this article? Darnovsky’s article explores the upcoming moral challenges that are tied to the renewed interest in marketing sex selection to parents. There are a myriad of ethical issues tied to the option of deciding the sex of one’s child that fall far outside the scope of the question â€Å"Are we playing God?† However, it is the implications of the option to decide the gender of a baby that are more profoundly disturbing. In a society where perfection in appearance and â€Å"brains† is already prized above all else, it seems unlikely that wealthy parents could resist the urge to guarantee that their child will be, really and truly â€Å"perfect.† In the class discussion following her presentation, the sentiment that â€Å"no one would try to make their baby perfect,† emerged. This is easily refutable by the work already being done in the field towards this end, as well as the phenomenon of â€Å"baby Einstein† products and other contemporary voodoo that promise parents that their babies will score extremely high on the SATs. Darnovsky explains the possible repercussions of the irresponsible marketing of sex selection including the challenges it will present to feminism, the resurgence of eugenics as well as the key transnational issues that are at stake. One of the biggest dangers highlighted is the rapid pace at which technologies are progressing. Darnovsky describes new technology like a runaway train progressing far faster than corresponding ethical considerations. In The Case for Animal Experimentation by Michael Fox, the philosophical, evolutionary and moral issues surrounding... ...ith Michael Fox that the unique human capacities make us very distinct from other animal species. However, we believe that saying that these capacities make us a superior species is an anthropocentric viewpoint, because it stems from the idea that our place in the world is the best possible. We do not think animals should be denied â€Å"full membership in the moral community† because of their â€Å" lack of autonomy and moral agency†. This judgment is entirely based on anthropocentric ideas of animals’ social organization and emotions. We do not agree with Fox that animals’ lives lack intrinsic value and that they are essentially meant for us to be used. Works Cited Darnovsky, Marcy. 2004. "Revisiting Sex Selection.† GeneWatch Volume 17: Number 1. Fox, Michael Allen. 1986. The Case for Animal Experimentation. pp. 31-90. Berkeley: University of California Press.