Post #7: Borlaug article & Individual Article

Norman Borlaug Article

The main ideas of this article were the various kinds of conventional technology and biotechnology that we must come up with in order to meet the needs of our quickly growing population. Biotechnology has already made a huge impact on medicine and public health. Now, scientists believe that it could also change the face of our agricultural system, for the better. Not only will biotechnology help raise production levels to feed millions of more people, but it will be helping clean and preserve the environment at the same time. Scientists can inject plants with various substances and chemicals to make the plant do almost anything that they want. Making the plants more sustainable, more productive, more durable, more nutritional and making them stronger against diseases are all aspects of the biotechnology work of plants. However, should farmers be permitted to use all of this technology to inject stuff into the food we eat everyday of our lives? How well do we trust the scientists when they tell us that none of these chemicals are harmful for our bodies? Yes, it is very important we find productive ways to meet the challenges of starvation and famine all across the world, but is it worth harming our own bodies in order to ensure that everyone is fed? This is a choice that society needs to make.


Individual Article: The Omnivors Dilemma, Chapter 17: The Ethics of Eating Animals

I decided that chapter 17 in “The Omnivores Dilemma” would be a very helpful source in writing paper number three. The title of the chapter is “The Ethics of Eating Animals” which primarily is a big part of what I will be discussing in this upcoming essay. Throughout the chapter Pollan discusses various points of views about whether it is or isn’t okay to be killing and eating animals. One of the main sources he uses is a book written by Peter Singer titled “Animal Liberation” which takes the side that even though we are omnivores, we shouldn’t be eating meat. Pollan gives many justifications for both sides of the argument, making it hard to even decide where you stand on the debate. I believe that one of the most helpful and controversial sections of the chapter will be the part in which he relates eating animal to owning slaves, or the oppression of women. Could it be that we are moving towards a society where we will be ashamed of the things we did to animals, just like we found ourselves ashamed after many years of slavery and discrimination? Could society ever reach that point of enlightenment? These are all good questions that are going to help me write a very in depth and meaningful paper.