Chemical-Industrialized farming VS green farming

         Food production is one of the most important fields that keep human being able to survive and to develop. When food production started it was on a small scale but it continued to grow with time across the centuries. As there was the farming revolution, industrialized farming had changed the world and the way we see food production industry nowadays. As a definition industrialized farming is the use of machinery and genetic engineering technologies in farming for food production. After the revolution of the technology and the use of machinery, farmers were able to produce huge amount of food that can cover the need of the growing population and may even exceed that need, this was simply a dream for many before the industrialized farming began. While industrialized farming helped increased food production, chemicals are frequently used to a achieve this increase, these chemicals are exposing farmers and damaging the environment, which makes it unethical to use chemicals in farming for food production .

One of the most important advancement of the industrialized farming in addition to the use of genetic engineering technologies to modify crops in a way that can increase the amount of food produced and the quality of fruits bared by trees, is the use of several chemicals as herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, fertilizers, and insecticides, and these chemicals are used for different purposes for example fungicides are used to kill fungus that can destroy crops, while fertilizers are used to increase the soil fertility and supply nutrients to the different plants in the farms.

The issue of farming was a focus point since the industrialization began as many farmers were happy knowing the fact, that we are able to produce huge amount of food for the generations living, and we could export some to neighboring countries, many corporate holders thought that fortunes could be made out of food industry and plus it is a source of power for a country to be able to compete in food industry, as a result the farming section flourished over years providing supplies for communities and sustaining lives. Many companies started producing chemicals that can reduce fungus, herbs, and pests that destroy crops, also genetic engineering section began to develop its ability to produce genetically engineered seeds that can survive harsh conditions and yet still give high yield with good quality fruits.

Many of the chemicals are used in farming on a regular base and some are applied several times a day which raises some concerns about whether they are safe to be used frequently for human especially for farmers, who are in regular and direct contact every day with these materials. Accordingly many studies have been done to create an understanding for the various chemicals that are being used in farms, some studies showed some bad side effects of different pesticides and herbicides on human health, while other studies suggest the devastating effects that these chemicals are producing for the environment.

During the last 20-30 years many researches were don, and many bad effects of the chemicals used in farming were discovered, some of the laws have been issued to switch certain materials or to forbid the use of others, but the question here remain valid should it be considered illegal to use chemicals in farming and to expose farmer who could be uneducated enough to avoid the side effects of certain chemicals?

As researches took place scientist started studying farmers, because they had the most contact with chemical pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides. It has been shown that farmers tend to have higher amount of immunoglobulin (antibodies) in there blood samples, and this is due to their continuous exposure to allergens, pollens, and chemicals. One of the diseases that was found in high percentage among farmers is multiple myeloma, as it has been reported by the British journal of cancer “Several occupational risks have been demonstrated, showing elevated mortality for myeloma among farmers, woodworkers, smeltermen and forgemen” (milham,1976).

“Multiple myeloma is a cancer that begins in plasma cells, a type of white blood cell. These cells are part of your immune system, which helps protect the body from germs and other harmful substances”, as came in the US national library of medicine. In multiple myeloma plasma cells looses control on its proliferation also looses the control on other cells proliferation and start accumulating in bones, as a result when the body encounters a bacteria it produces abnormal antibodies.

        Another research studied farmers have shown that many materials used as pesticides such as methyl bromide which is the most frequently used in California and Iowa farms can cause another type of cancer which is prostate cancer, it has been known that male over 50 years old have a risk factor for developing prostate cancer, but male farmers have higher percentage to develop that cancer. Methyl bromide was specifically mentioned in the American journal of epidemiology by many medical doctors and researchers from the department of epidemiology in university of Iowa “However, methyl bromide was significantly associated with prostate cancer risk among both North Carolina and Iowa pesticide applicators and among both private and commercial applicators.”(Alavanja, Samanic, Dosemeci, Lubin, Tarone, Lynch, Knott, Thomas, Hoppin, Barker, Coble, Sandler and Blair).

The health issues that are mentioned, are part of the problems that chemistry-industrialized farming causes, other potential problem that was recently the subject of interest is the effects on the environment, as the chemicals that are used are dumped into the soil, where many types of bacteria live in harmony with plants, where bacteria help to transform the air nitrogen into nitrates that the plants need to thrive, and the heavy use of pesticides can cause these beneficial bacteria to deteriorate, it is also known that this bacteria is needed to decompose the dead animal and plant parts which help restore soil fertility, as Misty Huber who wrote in magazines including “shape”, and “natural health” have stated that “Heavy use of pesticides in soil can cause beneficial bacteria in soil to deteriorate”.

Another environmental concern is the water, as these chemicals including pesticides and herbicides have high solubility in water, as John Marton a PhD student of environmental science at Indiana university says “These compounds can be picked up by rainwater and get carried away to nearby streams, lakes and wetlands, where they can contaminate drinking water and other aquatic resources, this can potentially threaten endangered species as well as other non-target organisms for which the effects resulting from exposure are not known”.

           One solution could be made is the switch to what is called the “organic farming”, in organic farming farmers uses both the industrial technologies and machines plus the ecological knowledge in food production so instead of using chemically prepared pesticides they use a naturally occurring ones, where these natural pesticides would not cause diseases like the chemical pesticides, this is done by “using several methods like crop rotations, animal husbandry, bio-fertilizers”, and many other methods (Tim J. LaSalle, PhD., Paul Hepperly, PhD., Director of research and Fulbright Scholar Rodale Institute).

Business keepers where concerned about the amount of production and whether the switch could impact their business, “The clash has become one of “capital versus communities,” whereby corporations use the Interstate Commerce Clause in an attempt to override state legislation aimed at protecting family farming and communities”(Linda Lobao and curtis stofferahn, community resource department Ohio state university), so it has been suggested that without the chemically intensive agriculture farmers will not be able to produce the same amount of food with the same quality, but according to the UN environment program reports, it has been shown that not only we will improve the food production qualitatively and quantitatively, but also we will have better environmental results, such as better soil fertility, retention of water, and resistance to drought. 

Organic farming practices where done in Africa for several years showed yield increase for over 100%, “the potential contribution of organic farming to feeding the world may be far higher than many had supposed.” (UNEP, “Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa,” 2008).

            Though chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides helped farmers to produce large amount of food supplies for the world, many bad environmental effects were left behind such chemicals, as it had killed many beneficial bacteria in the soil, and may contaminate many water supplies as these chemicals are sprayed into the soil and they have high water solubility, also it had caused disease for farmers over the long run such multiple myeloma and prostate cancer.  There were some laws passed about forbidding the use of some chemicals such as the use of the well known chemical DDT, but the old conventional ways are still used nowadays even with the presence of an alternatives such as the organic farming solution, which makes it necessary to focus on this subject as it is unethical to expose the huge amount of farmers to these chemicals that can kill then later.

_______________________________________________________________________

Work Cited Page:

Huber, Misty. "Herbicide and Pesticide Effects on Soil Bacteria." Meanstogreens (2020): n. Web. 24 Apr 2011. <http://www.ehow.com/about_6612542_herbicide-pesticide-effects-soil-bacteria.html

Bowman, Greg. "Organic vs. Industrial Agriculture." organic consumers association (2008): n. Web. 23 Apr 2011. <http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18988.cfm

Lobao, Linda, and Curtis W. Stofferahn. "The community effects of industrialized farming." Agriculture and Human Values (2007): 1-22. Web. 23 Apr 2011. <http://www.und.nodak.edu/org/ndrural/Community%20Effects%20of%20Industrialized%20Farming.pdf

Gallagher, R. P., J. J. Spinelli, J. M. Elwood, and D. H. Skippen. "Allergies and agricultural exposure as risk factors for multiple myeloma.." BJC british journal of cancer 48.6 (1983): 853-857. Web. 11 Apr 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011571/.

Epidemiol, Am. J. "Use of Agricultural Pesticides and Prostate Cancer." american journal of epidemiology 157.9 (2003): 800-814. Web. 11 Apr 2011. http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/157/9/800.short.

3-4 pages of Working essay

Multiple myeloma is a type of cancer that impact the immune system, in human there are cell called B-lymphocytes that when encounters a bacteria for example differentiates in to plasma cells which is responsible for antibody production to kill the bacteria, in multiple myeloma plasma cells looses control on its proliferation also looses the control on other cells proliferation and start accumulating in bones, as a result when the body encounters a bacteria it produces abnormal antibodies.

Another research studied farmers have shown that many materials used as pesticides such as methyl bromide which is the most frequently used in California and Iowa farms can cause another type of cancer which is prostate cancer, it is been known that male over 50 years old have a risk factor for developing prostate cancer, but male farmers have higher percentage to develop that cancer.

The health issues that are mentioned, are one of the problems that chemistry-industrialized farming causes, other potential problem that was recently the subject of interest is the effects on the environment, as the chemicals that are used are dumped into the soil, where many types of bacteria live in harmony with plants, where bacteria help to transform the air nitrogen into nitrates that the plants need to thrive, and the heavy use of pesticides can cause these beneficial bacteria to deteriorate, it is also know that this bacteria is needed to decompose the dead animal and plant parts which help restore soil fertility.

Another environmental concern is the water, as these chemicals have high solubility in water, that these materials can be picked by rainwater into a nearby lakes or streams and can contaminate drinking water, and there has not been any studies conducted about the long term effects of drinking such water.

One solution could be made is the switch to what is called the “organic farming”, in organic farming farmers uses both the industrial technologies and machines plus the ecological knowledge in food production so instead of using chemically prepared pesticides they use a naturally occurring ones, where these natural pesticides would not cause diseases like the chemical pesticides does, business keepers where concerned about the amount of production and whether the switch could impact their business, so it has been suggested that without the chemically intensive agriculture we will not be able to produce the same amount of food with the same quality, but according to UN environment program reports, it has been shown that not only we will improve the food production qualitatively and quantitatively, but also we will have better environmental result, such as better soil fertility, retention of water, and resistant to drought.

Organic farming practices where done in Africa for several years showed yield increase for over 100%, “the potential contribution of organic farming to feeding the world may be far higher than many had supposed.” (UNEP, “Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa,” 2008).

            Due to many bad effects of the chemical uses in farming on human health, and it bad impact on the environment for the long ran, it should be mad illegal to use chemically prepared or synthesized pesticides and fertilizers in farming, and business should encourage the switch to the organic farming because of the numerous benefits of these practices in addition to the sustainability of the amount of food production.

"Gap-fill" Annotated Bibs

Source # 5

Section 1:

Huber, Misty. "Herbicide and Pesticide Effects on Soil Bacteria." Meanstogreens (2020): n. Web. 24 Apr 2011. <http://www.ehow.com/about_6612542_herbicide-pesticide-effects-soil-bacteria.html>.

Section 2:

This source talks about the organic farming and the effects of herbicides and pesticides on the environment specially the soil and the water, as this source mentions that all the chemical used as herbicides and pesticides are water soluble and the are sprayed on the soil which itself forms a danger as it could be picked up by rainwater to nearby lacks and water streams which can contaminate drinking water.

The other issue that was mentioned in this source is the effect on the soil and the bacteria that inhabit the soil which is considered beneficiary to the plants as it help in transforming the air nitrogen into nitrates that is needed by the plants to thrive.

Section 3:

This source is relevant because it provide some information that was not covered by my other sources which is the environmental effects that the chemical used in farming may have introduced.

Section 4:

Relevant quotes:

“Heavy use of pesticides in soil can cause beneficial bacteria in soil to deteriorate” (Misty Huber).

 

2-3 Working Pages of Essay

Chemical-Industrialized farming VS green farming

Industrialized farming is the use of machinery and genetic engineering in farming for food production, one of the most important fields that keep human being able to survive is food production, before the industrialized farming farmers were not able to produce the amount of food required for the growing populations, but after the revolution of the technology and the use of machinery, farms started to produce huge amounts of food that was able to cover the need of the population and may be even exceed that need.

One of the most important advancement of the industrialized farming in addition to the use of genetic engineering technologies to modify crops in a way that can increase the amount of food produced and the quality of fruits bared by trees, is the use of several chemicals as herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, fertilizers, and insecticides, these chemicals are used for different purposes for example fungicides are used to kill fungus that can destroy crops, while fertilizers are used to increase the soil fertility and supply nutrients to the different plants in the farms.

The issue of farming was a focus point since the industrialization began as many farmers were happy knowing the facts that we are able to produce huge amount of food for the generations living, and we could export some to neighboring countries, many corporate holders thought that fortunes could be made out of food industry and plus it is a source of power for a country to be able to compete in food industry, as a result the farming section flourished over years providing supplies for communities and sustaining lives, many companies started producing chemicals that can reduce fungus, herbs, and pests that destroy crops, also genetic engineering section began to develop its ability to produce genetically engineered seeds that can survive harsh conditions and yet still give high yield with good quality fruits.

Many of the chemicals used in farming are used on a regular base and some are applied several times a day which raises some concerns about whether they are safe to be used frequently for human especially for farmers, who are in regular and direct contact every day with these materials, accordingly many studies have been done to create an understanding for the various chemicals that are being used in farms, some studies showed some bad side effects of different pesticides and herbicides on human health, while other studies suggest the devastating effects that these chemicals are producing for the environment.

During the last 20-30 years many researches were don, and many bad effects of the chemicals used in farming were discovered, some of the laws have been issued to switch certain materials or to forbid the use of others, but the question here remain valid should it be considered illegal to use chemicals in farming and to expos farmer who could be uneducated enough to avoid the side effects of certain chemicals?

As researches took place scientist started studying farmers, because they had the most contact with chemical pesticides, fertilizers, and herbicides, it has been shown that farmers tend to have higher amount of immunoglobulin (antibodies) in there blood samples, and this is due to their continuous exposure to allergens, pollens, and chemicals, one of the disease that was found in high percentage among farmers is multiple myeloma.

"Areas of Discussion" List

In my essay I will be discussing the following areas:

1. The human disease that arises from using chemically prepared pesticides and herbicides.( source 1 and 2)
2. The environmental destruction such as the soils that Is being filled with chemicals and the water that is becoming toxic with these chemical pesticides due to its solubility in water.( source 2 at the end of it)
3. The possible solution that the farmers should make in order to help the environment and human health.(source 3)
4. The challenges of that new solution and its impact on both sides the communities and the corporate.(source 4)

I choose these areas of discussions because they are basically what the issue is and I think that they will deliver the information smoothly and make my essay organized in chronological order.

"Circles of Evidence" List

Some information I have in my sources are shared such as:

1. All my sources were talking about the side effects of the use of chemicals in farming.

2. All sources talks in favor of the switch to green farming.

3. All sources mentioned the cancer association with the use of chemical herbicides and pesticides.

source 3 & 4 BiB.



Source # 3:

Section 1:

Bowman, Greg. "Organic vs. Industrial Agriculture." organic consumers association (2008): n. Web. 23 Apr 2011. <http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18988.cfm>.

Section 2:

 

This source talks about the benefits of the green farming aver the traditional chemically-industrialized farming, it basically suggest that with chemically prepared pesticides and fertilizers we are introducing diseases for many farmers also these chemicals are toxic and harmful to the environment, while in green farming we use natural materials that can improve our environment.

This source also talks about the several studies that challenges the green farming and basically explains that in fact if we switched to the green farming we could actually improve the quality of the food produced also improve the environment, the writer talks about the farming practices that are done in Africa that has actually improved the soil fertility, better retention of water and resistant of drought.

Section 3:

This source is relevant because it talks about the possible solutions to the chemically-industrialized farming, and also views the benefits of the green farming and the bad effects of the traditional farming, also show some statistics and how the green farming has indeed improved the quality of farming and food production industry.

Section 4:

Relative quotes:” organic systems can produce more food value per acre through intensive multi-cropping not
possible when pesticides are used” (Greg Bowman).

***********************************************************

Source # 4:

Section 1:

Lobao, Linda, and Curtis W. Stofferahn. "The community effects of industrialized farming." Agriculture and Human Values (2007): 1-22. Web. 23 Apr 2011. <http://www.und.nodak.edu/org/ndrural/Community%20Effects%20of%20Industrialized%20Farming.pdf>.

Section 2:

This source talks about the laws that regulate farming in the united states, and that it has been proved that the rational chemically-industrialized farming is producing bad chemicals that are used as herbicides and pesticides, and that it is better to switch to a more beneficial way.

This source views the issue as a corporate-general population problem, as the corporate people do not prefer to switch to the green farming because it is going to impact their profits from chemical selling, while these laws are trying to help the general public from exposing to all these chemicals that are destroying the environment and predisposing to cancers.

Section 3:

This source is relevant because it talks about the issue of the bossiness and the stakeholders who are benefiting from the use of different chemicals in farming abut without thinking about the general public and the environment.

Section 4:

Relative quotes:

“The clash has become one of ‘‘capital versus communities,’’ whereby corporations use the Interstate Commerce Clause in an attempt to override state legislation aimed at protecting family farming and communities” (Pittman,2004), (Linda Lobao and Curtis W. Stofferahn).

"topic choice" and source 1&2 BiB.

the topic that I choose is "industrialized farming and human health" as it sounds very interesting and I have no previous experience with agricultural topics and it sounds interesting too, also I have noticed that so much research have been done and plenty of resources available online.

 Two sources that I have found online are as follows:

Source 1:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011571/

source 2:

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/157/9/800.short


****annotated Bibliography: for source 1******

section 1:

Gallagher, R. P., J. J. Spinelli, J. M. Elwood, and D. H. Skippen. "Allergies and agricultural exposure as risk factors for multiple myeloma.." BJC british journal of cancer 48.6 (1983): 853-857. Web. 11 Apr 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2011571/.

section 2:

     According to this research it was found that farmers have higher incidence for certain cancers such as multiple myeloma, but no study was able to specify which type of farming is associated with multiple myeloma, as this study show that there is a relationship between farming and increase allergies among the farmers and there is a reported relationship between allergies and multiple myeloma.
     this is a great source because it is based on analysis which help creating a comparison between male and female farmers in terms of the types of cancers that can effect each group, As a result for this research it has been found that many immune components are elevated in many farmers blood such as IgD, IgE, IgA, and IgG

section 3:

This source is relevant to my research questions because it explains the effect of the materials used in farming such as pesticide and antifungal materials on the immune system of the farmers which is clearly a predisposing factor for cancer

section 4:

 Relevant quote: “Several occupational risks have been demonstrated, with Milham showing elevated mortality for myeloma among farmers, woodworkers, smeltermen and forgemen (Milham,

1976)”

****annotated Bibliography: for source 2:******

section 1:

Epidemiol, Am. J. "Use of Agricultural Pesticides and Prostate Cancer." american journal of epidemiology 157.9 (2003): 800-814. Web. 11 Apr 2011. http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/157/9/800.short.

section 2:

     According to this article male who work in farms for loge time are more prone to develop certain types of cancer basically this source talks about prostate cancer, the writer mentions that male who are above 50 years old have a risk factor to develop this cancer but the percentage highly increases among male farmers.

    The writer mentions that many materials can cause prostate cancer in male that are used in farming nowadays specially in California and Iowa farms, some of these materials are used as herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, and fungicides, the writer mentions one of the most frequently used material as pesticide is methyl bromide and it has been shown that this material is associated with high percentage of prostate cancer victims.

section 3:

This source is relevant to my research questions as it answers my question “what are the side effects of industrialized farming and human health”

section 4:

Relevant quote: “However, methyl bromide was significantly associated with prostate cancer risk among both North Carolina and Iowa pesticide applicators and among both private and commercial applicators.”( Am J Epidemiol)

"Moral Philosophy and Me"

I see my self a an absolutist, as I feel that this approach lies in the middle between relativism and universalism, also for me I think that cultural variation is something that we as human should be proud of as it adds more interest to people, for example if we only have the color yellow and we all wear yellow things it will be boring even to look at people, and at the same time we as human all know what is right and what is wrong and we do so not because we are cleaver rather our religious background have opened the way for us to realize what benefit the human civilization and flourish.

Me as a thinker I believe that extremes can never survive only the things that lie in the middle can do so, and accordingly I think that relativism and universalism are extremes and I would rather be in the middle with the absolutism.

My moral standard did not originate from my environment only rather many factors have added to my knowledge such as: religion, and what my creator gave me from intelligence and wisdom.

Competing ethical philosophies seem to over lap when others have different right/ wrong standard that can interfere with other group of people also in the declaration of human rights which reflect more universalism in the article 18 it seemed more like relativism ,as people accept other groups religion and they have the right to teach and to express their religion, so even a universalist can not make it without the help of a relativist, so eventually absolutism is the best approach provided among the “isms”  

Personal Response: moral absolutism & universalism

Benefits of moral universalism in governance:

Moral universalism talks about universal morals, ethics, and universal way of judgment of actions, benefits could be to unify people in their ways of looking at things as they will have a universal standards to measure actions, and to make it clear when people should be punished for an action, so in a way it helps to create standards where all people are equal in terms of rights and punishments.

Side effects in governance:

It diminishes the cultural values and the religious values that are absolute and this can create conflict between universalist and absolutists.

Benefits of moral absolutism in governance:

It also create standards but it is more cultural, and religious relative as it dominate a certain group of people, so it will create groups in a community that have different view of right/wrong actions according to their reference which is either cultural or religious value.

Danger of moral absolutism in governance:

If it is in forced by the governing system it will create inequality between people live in a community as it some people will have different view of what is right and what is wrong.  

Annotated Bibliography "Moral Universalism and Moral Absolutism"

1.moral universalism:

Section 1:

Hughes, J. "Problems of Transhumanism: Moral Universalism vs. Relativism." IEET Institute for Emerging Ethics and Technologies (2010): 1. Web. 3 Apr 2011. http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/hughes20100208/.

Section 2 :  

This source talks about the importance of giving people the equal rights according to moral universalism as the thinkers view all people as being equal before the laws and have same rights regardless of the race, religion, gender..etc.

On the other hand it has been criticized by other anti-universalism particularly the realist thinkers that it is very dangerous to claim that there is no cultural value of each community  that mater and that we know values because they are in our culture we did not create the values.
in this source the question that is being asked is, If rights were a recognition of a universal moral status derived from specific capacities for thought and feeling, then which groups of creatures possessed these faculties and which didn’t? and then provids some explanation with examples.

2.Moral Absolutism:

section 1:

McConnell, Terrance C. "MORAL ABSOLUTISM AND THE PROBLEM OF HARD CASES.." Journal of Religious Ethics 9.2 286. Web. 3 Apr 2011. http://www.wiley.com.proxy.library.vcu.edu/WileyCDA/.

Section 2:

This source talks about the idea that moral absolutism sacrifice the life of an innocent individual if it will bring benefit for other many people for example: killing an innocent person because not doing so will lead to the loss of hundreds of live, absolutism according to this source is good for governance in some situations where one person can die to rescue hundreds of other lives.

It is also dangerous for governance when we think about human rights and that people should have equal rights in term of living, so the death of that innocent person is unacceptable in this view.

Section 3 (both sources) :

These two resources are relevant to our research because they address the issues that relate moral universalism and absolutism to the governance and to international acceptance of other cultures.

Section 4 (both sources) :

Relevant quotes include:

“it is a problem for the absolutist because many do think that in these extreme circumstances an agent ought to do an act that is forbidden by absolutism in order to prevent some far greater evil”( McConnell, Terrance C.).

     “In fact, the Enlightenment actually threatened the local, embedded rights that people do possess because its universalism ignored the importance of local culture, seeking to overturn national traditions in favor of global cosmopolitanism”( Edmund Burke)

"Dear Me" reflective letter

During the past few weeks in the focus inquiry class we were talking about vacation cutting and FGM, especially on the subject that deals with whether it should be considered illegal in the United States of America. After finishing the essay I was trying to find out what was the most difficult, challenging, frustrating, educational, thought-provoking, and enlightening for me at that time.

The most difficult thing that I faced in the FGM and vacation cutting subject was the integration of all three thinkers Herskovits, Rachels, and Harris into the matter, as they were doing research about morality at a different time specially Herskovits.

The most challenging thing for me was to understand and integrate Harris speech in to the essay, also Herskovits’s quotes was a little hard to find as he mostly used examples rather that direct points as Rachels did.

The enlightening thing was Rachels approach to the consequences of cultural relativism as he showed examples of actions that were universally recognized as being wrong/right.

The most frustrating thing though was Harris speech when he questioned voluntary actions by the individuals and he viewed them as in forced actions rather than voluntary, because in his opinion that the community puts so much pressure on the members who live in it.

And for thought-provoking it was Harris talk about voluntary actions and Rachels talk about the consequences of accepting every action done by others.

But in the end there were many things educational such as to know about the different practices in other communities and to take a peek at the three thinker’s opinion.

I think that for the most part I will remember Rachels and Harris thoughts when I am at my 30^th age, as they are the most recent and have the most critical thinking attached to them.

I still have many questions that I will search for its answers, such as what about religion and people who choose to follow religion are their actions not considered voluntary?!!!!!!!!!!!, and many many other questions, I believe that I am a different thinker than Harris and Herskovits but I am more like Rachels, and the reason for that is that Herskovits ideas are nice but as Rachels said not all actions should be accepted, while Harris was an extreme example of universal morals and in his opinion all actions can be explained by other cultures which I strongly disagree with.

introduction

                                                                          Research Blog