Reply to comment

Like Elliot, I wasn't able to attend last week's session (we were at a conference with our lab in Utah), so I think I will probably repeat some of what was discussed in class but hopefully will touch on it in a new (diverse?) way.

i think one of the most interesting quotes put out there, that didn't get much feedback from all the above discussions was the one that was apparently posed by andrea: "why if its so (biologically) advantageous is diversity something with struggle with so much?" I think this is a really interesting question to pose... do we struggle with diversity because we have "higher" mental function? interestingly, if you read some literature discussing other species, animals also seem to have problems-- take the very simple example of pack behavior in wolves or clans in chimps. These have been described as furthering their own genetic pool (if your family lives so do genes related to you, hence darwinian heritance), but isn't this too a form of animal attempt to homogenize their surroundings? Okay, so i understand that this example is a bit of a stretch, but i think it brings up a very important issue about how we believe that problems with diversity (and the struggles therein) is partially a social construct (which brings us back to last weeks ideas about society as an all encompassing force).

if we talk about this in terms of the "designer baby" example: what defines the traits and characteristics we want in our child? society does. if society said all of a sudden that life past 40 wasn't worth living, then would having a child with a disease that hit past 40 be so bad? probably not. (admittedly, another extreme example). I think this is quite scary, because it means that the 'line' about what is acceptable to choose in your child, and how much power you are allowed to have, is defined by a volatile constantly changing entity- society. I really feel that many of these things are a matter of choice, and therefore it should be the child's right to choose-- ex. cochlear implants should be a choice on the part of hte child not the parent. however, i understand this idea brings up problems of its own because then what about the severe diseases which affect ability to function (both mentally/physically). its a complex issue that I struggle with-- and Im not sure there is any right way to approach it or one right answer.

lastly, i just wanted to touch on the fact that I think professors grobstein's points are really relevant here-- our advances in science and technology have been amazing and shouldn't go to waste. however, i think they should be used to FURTHER the diversity, through understanding-- ex. what brought it about in the first place, if/why it is necessary for survival, etc. its really important that we realize that diversity is around for a reason, and we can benefit from that more fully if we create an accepting space to do so.