Vibe check for Sep 15

Responses by PHIL 006 students, clustered using snowflake-arctic-embed2 and gemma3:12b

id	quote	question	answer
Objectivity and Assumptions
7	“But the important point is that citizen involvement in public health research during recent decades has highlighted that studies of environmental pollution often incorporate important assumptions that merit further investigation” (51)	Here, citizen involvement is argued as key to research in science. How likely is it that more research includes more of it as sources in the future?	Surely there would be a need for more citizen testimony & citizen science, which should be included to help raise awareness upward, especially in environmental science. Its impact, however, could be negated so that citizen participation remains only as a selling point. This would be like when the Paxil researchers eliminated harmful data towards children by grouping the data with data from adults.
Research & Unequal Access
3	Gordon Conway, the president of the Rockeller Foundation at the time, insisted that Vanda Shiva did not adequately consider the range of situations in which poor people find themselves. He argued that fruits and vegetables are often expensive or difficult to access and therefore many people subsist primarily on rice. (43)	Taking into account Shiva’s Critique in the case of the Golden Rice that it disregards the root causes of Vitamin A deficiency, how should research approach cases like this: should we prioritize more short-term benefits such as sticking fortifying a specific crop or focus on more long-term fixes that address root causes of issues and wanting to change that?	Conway does have a point that short-term solutions such as the golden rice can provide an immediate relief to low income people. However, I agree with Shiva that research should not ignore the underlying causes, as acknowledging these causes can prevent other health related problems. I believe that scientists should focus their research on what can assist lives currently, while at the same time creating long term benefits.
9	Even if a large number of people suffer from a disease, it us difficult to receive a positive return if those who suffer from it can pay only a small amount of their healthcare	If so does that means the values scientist push forward for, lean more towards the rich rather than the poor? How are scientific values supposed to be seen as equal if we as people aren’t seen as equal based on our finical status.	NA
10	“GDP can be very misleading, however, when used to draw inferences about the well-being of a society. it does not reflect inequities in the wealth of a population, it does not reflect the ways in which economic production may be depleting natural resources,” (46)	as a society do you think that our research is biased to make/prioritize money in every field, ignoring some long term consequences?	I do feel like our technology has a history of being focused on material wealth without people thinking about the long term consequences. an example of this is how we have modified crops in the US but some require more water and other nutrients which can make the land go bad faster.
Innovation and Systemic Change
2	…the development of genetically modified crops merely exacerbates the trend in low-income countries toward adopting industrial agricultural practices…. they encourage farmers to grow only a single crop in their fields and to kill all other plants (including greens that are high in vitamin A) with herbicides.	There is a clear intent by scientists and researchers to help people out with innovation, but sometimes they prioritize something new and different over working on an already existing system. Are there any downsides to this method of putting old systems to the side in favor of new ones?	I’m torn on both sides of this to be honest, I feel like it really depends on the context/efficiency of an old system to really determine whether or not a new one should be implemented. For example, if an old system is really struggling to serve it’s basic function, then I think implementing a new system could be beneficial. But if an old system is working well, just has some areas where it needs tweaking, I think it could be better to focus on those aspects and try to refine them. I guess in the end it’s more on the matter of what’s easier and faster to implement, and so introducing a new system could just be faster.
6	“Some contemporary agricultural researchers focus on developing genetically engineered seeds, while others are more interested in developing ecologically friendly strategies for raising multiple crop and animal species together. Each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses that tend to promote different social values.”(45-50ish my ipads page numbers arent loading correctly)	How does each approach towards crops reflect their ethical values?	It reflects their social values for what is best for a society. One focuses on improvement and potential profit. While the other prioritizes sustainability and biodiversity.
13	One of the advantages of these approaches to agricultural research is that they feed smoothly into the activities of agricultural biotechnology companies. These companies can generate significant profits by patenting new fertilizers, pesticides, and seed varieties	how might profit motive influence science and what are the ethical concerns it might bring?	Being profit driven can decide which problems to prioritize. This could lead to several ethical concerns. For example, by focusing on commercial rather than ethical issues, or in the case of the quote the loss of farmers rights to replant seeds.
Values & Societal Impact
1	One way for values to influence the study of a particular research topic is by affecting the methods that are used for investigating it” (Elliot 43).	What do we do in situations when scientists disagree on which methods a particular value endorses? When two scientist hold the same background value but they disagree on how it influences research how do we decide between them?	One answer is to use the cost benefit analysis we discussed in the last class. If one way of conducting the research was to have more net positive benefits then we should choose that method. Another solution would be to choose the method that best satisfies the value that both scientist support, however this runs into its own problems.
4	“Philosopher Hugh Lacey refers to these differing approaches as ‘research strategies,’ and he argues that they are highly significant because they tend to shift society in different directions” (45)	What are these different directions Lacey is referring too? Does he mean differing opinions or that the world is shaped differently depending on the ‘research strategies’ we pursue?	I think by different directions Lacey means the path society chooses and all the possible impacts that could have would change the world a little or a lot. Although maybe he’s just referring to how society tends to have opposing opinions on how research and science is performed.
5	approaches from the social sciences have often been given short shrift because of the dominant social and political values favored methods from the natural sciences.	How can we be certain that our current values as a society are the right ones to use when addressing scientific research and their methods? is it possible?	At the very least it is very difficult. The values of a society can’t shift or change overnight. Also, living in a society will likely make you somewhat biased toward that society, which makes it harder to pinpoint anything specific which may be detrimental.
8	“Deciding how much to trust particular studies frequently depends on evaluating methodological assumptions.”	Why is it important to question the methods that scientists use in their studies?	It’s important because their methods can change depending on what they’re studying, and how long the study lasts. By questioning the methods, people can make sure that the research being conducted is fair and accurate.
11	When the subject of an investigation is socially important, these disagreements about how to approach a research topic can have major ramifications for society and can support very different. values.	How can differing research approaches on socially important issues influence the values and decisions upheld by society?	I think that the differing research approaches are a big factor when it comes to issues that influence our decisions held by different societies, because the way that the research is done and whether it includes any harm to something that is very culturally normal for one section of that society, it could entirely be different for another section in the same society, because there are very culturally diverse societies but even then there are groups within those societies themselves that will differ from the allegedly “normal” decisions held up by the society.
12	values can also alter assumptions that scientists make over the course of their investigations. In order to perform their research successfully scientists have to make assumptions about a wife range ion issues, including what counts as legitimate evidence, which methods are best suited for collecting and analyzing evidence, how best to interpret evidence, and how best to handle gaps or limitations in evidence.” pg 48	How much should a scientist’s personal or cultural values affect the way they do research, and can science ever be completely unbiased if these values always play a role?	Values will almost always playa role in scientific research as it is almost impossible to have complete objectivity. Scientists do try to minimize these biases but in general someones values should not be put into the equation of scientific research unless for a greater good or other exceptions.