Is Anatomy Destiny?

 

View video related to the sex industry or human trafficking.
Is Anatomy Destiny? (TED|18:32)
Link to Video -> https://www.ted.com/talks/alice_dreger_is_anatomy_destiny#t-2395
In this talk, Alice Dreger asks this question, “Why do we let our anatomy determine our fate?” Alice Dreger works with people at the edge of anatomy, such as conjoined twins and intersexed people. In her observation, it’s often a fuzzy line between male and female, among other distinctions.
In your essay, please address the following questions:
What are the basic issues and main themes addressed in the videos?
Were the issues addressed from a biased or unbiased perspective? Were the presenters operating with an underlying agenda?
Was there agreement or disagreement among presenters regarding the main issues addressed?
What were the major moral/ethical issues related to these topics?
How do the ethical perspectives of subjectivism, relativism, and/or emotivism relate to this topic?

Sample Solution

Alice Dreger works with people at the edge of anatomy, such as conjoined twins and intersexed people. In her observation, it is often a fuzzy line between male and female, among other anatomical distinctions. Which brings up a huge question: Why do we let our anatomy determine our fate? The author, Alice Dreger, wants to know why we let our anatomy decide how our future is going to be. In the future, as science continues to become better, are we still going to continue to look at anatomy? Would we ever confess that a democracy that was built on anatomy might be collapsing? We now know that sex is complicated enough that we have to admit nature doesn’t draw the line for us between male and female, or between male and intersex and female and intersex; we actually draw that line on nature.

regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pieces of data that can be put away in prompt (present moment) memory, how much data inside every one of those lumps can be very high, without unfavorably influencing the review of similar number

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.