PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11587769

What makes genetically modified organisms so distasteful?

K G Davies
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The debate concerning genetically modified organisms goes on unabated and reflects some genuine concerns. I suggest that a significantly large number of educated people believe that moving genes around between species is intuitively wrong and that this is based on an essentialist view of the world. This essentialist view has a long history that dates back to Plato and Aristotle and was eventually overthrown by the population thinking of Charles Darwin. The essentialist, who is antipathetic to population thinking, will naturally find the transfer of a gene from one organism to another distasteful, and this, I argue, is the result of Platonic thinking, which still remains and casts its spell over us today.

Explore related subjects

CultureGenetic EngineeringHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyHistory, 21st CenturyHistory, AncientPhilosophyHistorical ArticleJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

K G Davies. 2001. What makes genetically modified organisms so distasteful?. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-7799(01)01767-x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Prone to pregnancy: Orlando, Virginia Woolf and Sally Potter represent the gestating body.

The visibility of pregnancy in contemporary societies through various forms of medical imaging has often been interpreted by feminist critics as negative for the autonomy and experience of pregnant women. Here, I consider the representation of pregnancy in Virginia Woolf's novel, Orlando, and Sally Potter's film of the same name arguing that, despite limited critical attention to Orlando's pregnancy, these texts offer a productive interpretation of gestation that counters conventionally reductive cultural images of that embodied state. In particular, I argue that Potter's translation of Woolf's novel to the screen gives us a useful model for thinking through the new visibility of pregnancy in contemporary Western culture.

Culture↗
PubMed2007

Should the precautionary principle guide our actions or our beliefs?

Two interpretations of the precautionary principle are considered. According to the normative (action-guiding) interpretation, the precautionary principle should be characterised in terms of what it urges doctors and other decision makers to do. According to the epistemic (belief-guiding) interpretation, the precautionary principle should be characterised in terms of what it urges us to believe. This paper recommends against the use of the precautionary principle as a decision rule in medical decision making, based on an impossibility theorem presented in Peterson (2005). However, the main point of the paper is an argument to the effect that decision theoretical problems associated with the precautionary principle can be overcome by paying greater attention to its epistemic dimension. Three epistemic principles inherent in a precautionary approach to medical risk analysis are characterised and defended.

Culture↗