Saturday, April 11, 2009

Science - a menace to civilisation?

I do not believe at all that science is a menace to civilisation. Science is an unknown fact being continuously explored by man, and even the smartest scientist is just like a child opening the doors to the laws of nature, limited only by the human brain. Science is the discovery and manipulation of the laws of nature, and to condemn science is to restrict mankind’s curiousity and abilities.

Medical science has been the key to increase our life expectancy, greatly. Since the invention of anti-biotic from world war two, many people, including you and I, have been treated with it and cured of our common bacteria infections within just a few days. Vaccination, surgery, genetic engineering are just some other products of medical science which helps improve and lengthen our lives. However, biological weapons such as germ-releasing bombs as well as other inhumane experiments were used by Unit 731, Japan during World War Two on the prisoners of war. With this we can tell that science have many uses, whether good or bad. But science is a law of nature. It cannot think and it cannot perform without the hands of a human being. Hence, it is really up to humans to decide whether to put science into good or bad use, to hold responsibility to control this great and dangerous power.

However, does a destructive power actually equate to being bad? Take the two atomic bombings of Japan in World War Two for example. The US president Harry Truman has been given too choices before he decided to drop the bombs: to sacrifice more than 500,000 allied lives to conquer every Asia pacific islands, then mainland Japan, or to use the newly researched bomb. The decision was simple, 500,000 innocent lives and millions other grieving for their deaths just isn’t worth it. Also, if such a powerful destructive force could be used to arm the United Nations to maintain world peace, I believe conflicts around the world would be severely decreased. Hence, if destructive science could be used in a good cause, and alongside with all the benefits it holds, it certainly wouldn’t be a menace to civilisation.

Scientific research has also genetically improved crops and animals. Most of the foods we eat now have been genetically modified to make it taste better; grow larger to meet the demands of the growing human population. If it wasn’t for genetic engineering the world would be in a shortage of food with the limited arable land the earth has. Imagine vivisection without anaesthesia. If it wasn’t for science to invent anaesthetics many would have to undergo the pain and sufferings to cure ourselves of serious illnesses. Child mortality rates have been severely decreased over the past few centuries thanks to science. If it wasn’t for improved medical conditions many of us would already be victims of it.

Science has also improved our living conditions, and has equipped us with various technological devices and has improved communications all around the world. Technological advances have only been possible because of various discoveries of scientific knowledge put into practice. If it wasn’t for science our knowledge of people living in other countries would be greatly reduced. Hence, science could not possibly be a menace to our civilisation with so many benefits it raised.

Many questioned science for experimenting on animals, violating animal rights. However, should our knowledge be hindered by the fact that animal experimenting is cruel and immoral? Should we take human experimentation over animals if this is the case, like the Nazis and the Japanese did in World War Two? Which would be more cruel and immoral? Refusing to use animal experimentations to develop cures for humans would be childish and stupid. Many people have been outraged by such experiments, yet they themselves have been using the cures once experimented on animals. Therefore, to condemn science is an act of idiocy and to command the powers it beholds is ultimately up to ourselves.

Friday, April 3, 2009

Explain the nature of pornography and give your reasons to why we should/should not exercise any form of censorship in this area.

Pornography refers to explicit sexual content which comes in many different forms of media with only one objective – to sexually arouse the viewer. Pornography has evolved throughout the past decades mainly from print to non-print. It has also become a huge profitable business and has been also called “recession proof”. According to the 2006 statistics, 89% of internet pornography was made by the US, with 4% made by Germany and 3% by Britain. Also, the average age of which a person first saw internet pornography is 11, an awful and obscene number. It is definitely not hard at all to accidentally “stumble” upon a pornographic website unknowingly, and others, out of curiousity, when they first view such materials, it would be very likely to be addicted to it, very much alike gambling. In the same statistics, the worldwide pornography revenues is at a staggering $100 billion, an amount no technology companies, even combined, could make. Much of the income generated is being given to the subjects of the content, mainly the female characters.

While most of us does not realize or experience how pornography have affected the lives of the individuals who perform in them, pornography actually bring about the most serious problems to their lives as well as to their relatives. A woman who decides to enter the adult industry would have to put their families, relations with friends, and more importantly, their future at risk. Many of a time we look down upon such actors, and would refer them as “dirty” and see no difference in them when compared to a prostitute, yet many people are active consumers of pornography. One might argue that it is the women’s fault for entering the adult industry in the very first place. Yet with the super high demand of pornographic materials, despite the hundreds of millions of websites available already, more and more innocent young women are being lured into this horrifying industry – because of the fantastic pay being offered to them, especially when no skill is required at all. It would result in a life-lasting effect since most of these actors have no other skills and thus would not be able to find another job when their youth is used up. I believe that almost no single parent would want to see their children ending up in the adult industry. Family relations are severely damaged when their children decides to enter the industry. And even if they regret joining the industry, many of them does not leave simply because they could hardly find a job that pays equally as well. Hence, I strongly believe that pornography should be censored to prevent harm caused to the actors and actresses. However, pornographic materials have been used to a small extent in the medical industry. Pornography is used when a couple decides to have children without the need to engage in sexual intercourse, to collect sperm from the male’s sexual organs.

Women in mainstream pornography are commonly being treated as “sex slaves”, and convey deceiving messages that all women want to be raped. In actual fact the actors are only told to do so, possibly to be paid more. This however may be very misleading to consumers. Statistics have shown that cases of rape have been increasing at a terrifying rate across the globe for the past few decades, where pornography was first introduced. Hence, pornography not only brings harm to the actors, but also to several other innocent victims who are not involved at all to this industry. Does pornography actually degrades women? I believe to a large extent yes. In most pornographic content women are treated as sex objects to satisfy man’s pleasure. Elements of hostilities are often present to appeal to the male viewers and the women are depicted as though they are lifeless creatures craving for the men, hence degrading them.

Therefore, I strongly believe that censorship of pornography should be firmly imposed such that it could prevent problems, emotionally and physically, to almost all women across the world, despite all other problems that might surface.