More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments against stem cell research
Arguments against stem cell research
Arguments against stem cell research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Arguments against stem cell research
A confirmation bias is when an individual searches for information that he or she believes in while ignoring any evidence that may contradict, or oppose it. An example of a confirmation bias that I have experienced in my own life is when I was writing a research paper on stem cell research for my biology class. While writing the research paper, I only researched and wrote about the positive aspects of stem cell research, and neglected to research any negative aspects because as the time I believed that stem cell research was primarily beneficial, and as a result I only wrote about the positive aspects on the topic. I was affected by a confirmation bias because I only focused on the positive aspects of stem cell research which I agreed with
When the issue of stem cell research was under scrutiny pro-life advocates exposed experiments from the late 60's and early 70's that had a profoundly "grotesque" quality (Maynard-Moody 15). For example in one experiment several fetuses had their heads removed and scientists observed the effects of starvation of the brain. These revelations gained the pro-life advocates a lot of support and mad the topic of fetal tissue research very "controversial". The controversy was revived when President Bill Clinton took office and "rescinded" President Bush's ban on fetal tissue stem cell research. Before Clinton all presidents. Were pro-life and many took measures to restrict or stop stem cell research (Steinbock 170-71).
For the past few years stem cell research has been a widely debated topic; however, former President Clinton?s stance?allowing federal money to be spent on tightly controlled stem cell research?lead to intense debates over federal funding for stem cell research. There are four ways of obtaining stem cells, which are taken from embryos that are approximately one week old. They are using unwanted embryos from fertility clinics, embryos from aborted fetuses, cloned embryos, and embryos created for research purposes. Stem cells can also be taken out of adult bone marrow, but scientists do not think that adult stem cells hold as much medical potential. Conservatives are against federal funding for stem cell research because they feel that by doing such the government would be contributing to ?murder.? This idea is rooted in the religious beliefs, which include the belief that life begins at conception, held by conservatives. However, liberals support federal funding for the research of embryos because they question whether embryos are full human beings and believe the research could expedite potential medical breakthroughs.
Furthermore, the authors aim to unfold the scientific logic of their analysis of the effects of hidden biases so people will be “better able to achieve the alignment,” between their behavior and intentions (Banaji and Greenwald, 2013) preface
Confirmation Bias: A perfect example would pertain to when the victims of sexual assault from the University of North Carolina stuck together, they bonded when no one else would listen and believe them. They sought out each other and many others around the United States as the film continued until they had proven their point. The two women, Andrea and Annie just kept moving forward while avoiding those that
Many people believe that ostriches bury their heads in the sand in the belief that if they can’t see a predator, it cannot see them and that lemmings often commit mass suicide to avoid overpopulation. These examples show confirmation bias, anchoring, and the halo effect. Neither “fact” is true. According to National Geographic, Ostriches do not bury their heads in the sand. If a predator threatens its nest, an ostrich will flop to the ground and remain still, laying its head against the sand to try to blend in with it. With only its body visible, from a distance, it looks like the ostrich has buried its head in the sand.
at this moment in time, I learned how my own biases affected my patient care. In the ever
Thought processes can greatly influence people's social interactions, and the way that they live their lives. Cognitions develop how people perceive themselves and others on a daily basis. It is important to investigate how people attribute actions and behaviors exhibited, not only by themselves, but also those around them. These attributions shape the way an observer feels and reacts to others, and how people feel about themselves due to their own actions. The correspondence bias (fundamental attribution error) and the self-serving bias are two errors made in attribution by virtually every human being (Baron & Byrne, 2000). Both of these biases can be shown not only in adults, but also children (Guern, 1999). Even sport spectators display these biases when watching their favorite teams (Wann & Schrader, 2000). When the self-serving bias is absent in people's cognitions, they will show the self-defeating attributions. It is important to study people that demonstrate self-defeating attributions, because these individuals also show symptoms of depression (Wall & Hayes, 2000). Clearly, attributions are an imperative aspect of social cognition. Attributional bias is discussed by Marie Beesley. It is also important to investigate the factors that affect people's judgment biases in decision making and reasoning skills, which is explored by Amanda Wheeler. Because these two processes are so vital to the way in which people perceive themselves and others, and to the way a person chooses to behave, it is important to understand the factors that can cause inaccurate judgments. Judgment biases affect the way people form conclusions and make attributions about others, as well as abou...
Reliabilism, an epistemological theory created to combat skepticism, claims that a person knows that p if and only if (1) p is true, (2) this person believes that p is true, and that (3) this person has come to the conclusion p via a reliable belief-forming process. A “reliable belief-forming process” could simply be a perceptive act, since reliabilism entails externalism. Externalism claims that you can have knowledge despite not knowing how you came about it (knowing the evidence), exactly. For example, imagine a boy sitting on the beach. He sees a woman walking past him no more than twenty feet away and forms the belief that there is a woman walking past him. Now, he many not exactly understand how he reached that belief, especially when it comes to cognitive processes involved, but nevertheless the fact that his perceptual processes worked reliably justifies his belief. Reliabilism’s analysis is also consistent with fallibilism, which claims that people can be incorrect in their beliefs and still be justified in their beliefs. Once again, consider the boy on the beach. His perceptual processes have consistently served him correctly; for these processes to fail and deceive him would be extremely unlikely, rendering his belief justified even if he were somehow wrong in his belief.
Stem cell research has been a heated and highly controversial debate for over a decade, which explains why there have been so many articles on the issue. Like all debates, the issue is based on two different arguments: the scientific evolution and the political war against that evolution. The debate proves itself to be so controversial that is both supported and opposed by many different people, organizations, and religions. There are many “emotional images [that] have been wielded” in an attempt to persuade one side to convert to the other (Hirsen). The stem cell research debate, accompanied by different rhetoric used to argue dissimilar points, comes to life in two articles and a speech: “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? Yes, Don’t Impede Medical Progress” by Virginia Postrel; “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? No, It’s a Moral Monstrosity” by Eric Cohen and William Kristol; and “Remarks by Ron Reagan, Jr., to the 2004 Democratic National Convention” by Ron Reagan, Jr. Ethos, pathos, and logos are the main categories differentiating the two arguments.
People with strong opinions such as environmentalists & anti-GMO activists support Seralini’s study as compelling scientific evidence and recognize corporate/scientist agendas, therefore, are justified in having their strong opinions.
The Zundel vs. Citron case explains bias as, “a state of mind that is in some way predisposed to a particular result or that is closed with regard to particular issues,” (Zundel vs. Citron). Due to the importance that bias can play in a decision, the courts have created a legal test to determine if it exists in any given situation. The test is, “what would an informed person, viewing the matter realistically and practically – and having thought the matter through –
The backfire effect is when a fact is disconfirmed based on scientific evidence, resulting in someone having a stronger belief that the fact is correct, by using counter arguments to avoid being wrong (Lewandowsky,119). Confirmation bias can be defined as prejudice towards a subject or matter due to preexisting beliefs. As a result, the backfire effect is conceptually related to confirmation bias because both the backfire effect and confirmation bias are limiting themselves to the acquisition of new information or knowledge to a certain extent. In the article by Lewandowsky, the idea of politics is briefly brought up. The backfire effect is extremely prominent in the world of politics. For example, in a casual political debate amongst friends or family the more the debaters try to reason their beliefs the less likely who they are debating against will
Confirmation bias describes a tendency to specifically choose new information to reassert the beliefs of the current information (Robbins, Judge, Millet & Boyle, 2011). Again, since the selection committee has had an initial impression of the two candidates, there may be a tendency to quickly come to a conclusion and disregard new information that could actually be relevant. Soll, Milkman and Payne (2015) explains that people easily rely on System 1 and System 2 thinking when making decisions, which come from “automatic judgements” from past memory and deviating from the actual objective from laziness, respectively. This type of thinking limits the ability to think logically, called “cognitive rigidity”, which can stem from “time pressure, negative emotions, exhaustions, and other stressors” (Soll, Milkman & Payne 2015, p.7). The selection committee’s important decision can intensify these stressors, and must recognise this bias in order to make a logical
The definition is “…the tendency to attribute greater accuracy to the opinion of an authority figure (unrelated to its content) and be more influenced by that opinion” (Wikipedia, n.d.). As an example, I saw my primary care physician for back pain in 2011 to seek advice and a diagnosis to improve my quality of life. My physician told me it was most likely due to muscle soreness and advised me to discontinue lifting weights for approximately one month, use ice and heat and rest until the pain went away. I took her word on this, regardless of her specialty, because she was a doctor with many years of experience and education beyond what I had. I followed her instructions based on the fact she had authority over medical knowledge which was out of my scope of knowledge. The pain continued for many months and I finally saw a neurosurgeon who informed me I had bulging discs at the L3-L4 and L4-L5 areas of the lumbar spine which was causing the pain. I realized my bias was based on the fact she was a doctor without regard to her specialty or
According to Meheaut (2012), preconceptions are defined as “opinions or conceptions formed in advance of “true” knowledge or experience. Thus, preconceptions can be considered also as prejudices or biases in forming scientific concepts. From the perspective of cognitive psychology, preconceptions can be defined as learner’s biased schemas of objects and phenomena” (Meheaut, 2012, para. 10). Preconceptions are often ideas and/or thoughts students’ have in regards to a particular topic or subject area. The “pre-instructional knowledge” (preconceptions) that students’ bring into the classroom can be based on things such as intuition, everyday life experiences, and information learned in other settings (Lucariello & Naff, 2017).