Reflections on Daniel Callahan's "Individual Good and Common good: A communitarian approach to bioethics" And bioethics as they relate to synthetic biology.

1) American culture and Science: A blind march toward advancement. 

This has been a topic of interest for me for most of my college career. As I've argued in previous papers- America has been, up until now, a culture totally absorbed with it's historical spirit of westward expansion. Our scramble toward the promises of an unknown future are devoid of consideration for anyone or anything but the rambunctious individual- The romantic cowboy figure is always alone as he blazes new trails.

Science, unfortunately, often falls under this umbrella. Perfectly compassionate engineers and researchers will overlook the hundreds their "progress"puts out of work, or the rift they cause when their helpful technology is only financially available to a wealthy portion of the population. But it is a cultural problem. They're wearing the blinders we were all handed as children- those which obscure our view of the past, and the parallels of the present.

America is now going through torturous growing pains. (obviously) As we struggle to move from our colonial mindset toward that of a global citizenry, We are starting to question the limits of rugged individualism. This is, indeed, reflected in Callahan's call to move bioethics toward communitarian principles.

2) Biological morality

One disagreement I have with Callahan's sentiments is the vague suggestion that humans aren't equipped with morality when they are without religion. Science shows that some of the core elements of morality- The importance of intent, consideration for others, etc.- have some neurological basis. There are also pragmatic ethics- we all follow certain rules to create a better environment for everyone. It simply makes sense to do so. 

3) Historical bio-politics: Women and anesthetic during childbirth

When  anesthetics first became available for women in childbirth there were two major positions on the issue. The first was that women were meant to suffer during childbirth because that was Eve's (of the Garden of Eden) punishment for disobedience to God. The second was that women shouldn't have to suffer if they didn't need to and that the other camp's argument was old-fashion and ridiculous.

While the second camp had an progressive argument that was full of good intention, we are now starting to find that blocking the sensations of birth can have negative effects. Women's brains release a huge amount of bonding hormones as a response to these sensation- hormones that help them bond with their new babies. This is information women should have before they decide how they want to give birth.

4) Germany- Privacy and public good 

Americans have a hard time agreeing what constitutes a private matter and a public matter. Two volatile examples being Gun Control and Abortion. All the evidence needed is in the reactions to the NSA spying. They ran the gambit of "Whatever" to "This is a cultural crisis".

Germans had a very different reaction in that they were fairly united in being highly repelled. Germans tend to value their privacy with good reason. Unjust spying on citizenry was practiced by two of their most abusive governments. Many Germans, in fact, mask their identity on social media and email with a pseudonym. However, Germany is highly dedicated to it's public good. With generous unemployment, maternity benefits, and education, the proof is in the budget alone. It is also worth noting that Germany is a country with a high output of scientific advancement.

Cultural comparison helps highlight why bioethics are disscussed the way they are in America vs. other leaders in Science.