4.2 Article

You can't keep a bad idea down: Dark history, death, and potential rebirth of eugenics

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ar.24849

关键词

CRISPR; eugenics; medical genetics; prejudice; racism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This passage introduces a story about a teaching project and review topic, emphasizing the original design and goals of the curriculum, as well as an introduction to the history of eugenic thought. The article focuses on the interaction between science and society, delving into specific case studies on eugenic issues, and aims to educate students to question the correct application of science and its technology.
Be careful what you wish for: This adage guides both how this project came to life, and how the topic covered in this review continues to unfold. What began as talks between two friends on shared interests in military history led to a 4-year discussion about how our science curriculum does little to introduce our students to societal and ethical impacts of the science they are taught. What emerged was a curricular idea centered on how good intentions of some were developed and twisted by others to result in disastrous consequences of state-sanctioned eugenics. In this article, we take the reader (as we did our students) through the long and soiled history of eugenic thought, from its genesis to the present. Though our focus is on European and American eugenics, we will show how the interfaces and interactions between science and society have evolved over time but have remained ever constant. Four critical 'case studies' will also be employed here for deep, thoughtful exploration on a particular eugenic issue. The goal of the review, as it is with our course, is not to paint humanity with a single evil brush. Instead, our ambition is to introduce our students/readers to the potential for harm through the misapplication and misappropriation of science and scientific technology, and to provide them with the tools to ask the appropriate questions of their scientists, physicians, and politicians.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据