To navigate through this website please use the table of contents ("Blog-Archiv").
Sources:
www.cornelsen.de
www.nibis.de
Siepmann, Dirk et al. Writing in English: A Guide for Advanced
Learners. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto, 2008.
Mittwoch, 27. Mai 2009
Possible Results: 3. Assignment
3) Discuss the relation between the World State and our society in Germany in the year 2009.
Aldous Huxley created with Brave New World an influencial utopian science fiction novel. He incorporated the drastic changes of the early 20th century like the ongoing victory of industrialization, the dramatic political changes after the Great War and their influence on his contemporaries. The carnage of the trench-warfare in Belgium and France with its industrial means of killing disrupted the idea of mankind. Psychology was on the rise as man tried to find reason no longer in religion but within himself. Being troubled by these developments Huxley wrote his novel of ideas as a warning. Some may say that Huxley presented an alternative to the woes of the Modern Age. Some may say that he came up first with the idea John Lennon adopted in his song Imagine: “Nothing to kill and die for, a brotherhood of man.” In the following essay I will discuss the relation between the World State and today’s society in Germany. Accordingly I will scrutinize the role of religion, drugs, sexuality, and the class system in both societies.
Religion seems to play no role in the World State. The novel describes the whole life of an average denizen of the Apha-cast, Bernard Marx, without mentioning him visiting a temple or a church. The reader witnesses only during Bernard’s visit in the reservation something that ressembles brute religious rites. These rites remind the reader of native reiligions. On page 101 Lenina and Bernard witness such a ceremony, which is accompanied by “drums” and “flute-playing.” Later on the ceremony developes into a fierce ritual of flagelation and bloodshed, but there is a connection made that leads us to the religious life in the World State. The ceremony reminds Lenina of the “Solidarity Services and the Ford’s Day celebrations (p. 101).” Religion in the World State is replaced by pseudo-religious rites to please the people’s need for community. It is instrumentalized to stabilize the state.
In our society religion plays a different role. For the last 50 years the Catholic and Protestant churches constantly lost members. In many parts of the country the churches are empty even during Sunday’s service. The Catholic as well as the Protestant church has problems to recruit new priests. Nevertheless, our country witnessed a wave of appreciation when the German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger became the new pope. Besides this sign of new interest all kinds of spiritual movements grow bigger and bigger. A spiritual need of the people is obvious.
Soma plays an important role in the ceremonies like the “Solidarity Service.” The drug is passed around and everybody participating in the ceremony takes it (c.f. p.72). But soma is not only used during the rites. It is part of the daily life and surpresses unpleasent emotions. The result is a state of constant pleasentness in the life of the denizens of the World State. Deprivation of the often used drugs reveals that one result of the constant use is a lack of capability to deal with negative experiences. When Lenina meets the first inhabitants of the reservation she realizes that she has lost her soma and gets depressed: “’Oh, I wish I had my soma.’(p.104)”
In our society drugs are used, as well. During the last decades our society has witnessed an increase in drug use. The use of alcohol did not rise but stay at a very high level. It seems like people can not stand to stay entirely sober. They use alcohol and drugs to entertain themselves, to forget problems or simply because they think they need it to open themselves to other people. The big difference is that our society addresses the problem of misuse and tries to advertise modest use. Still nobody thinks of an entire prohibition.
The first chapter of the novel introduces us to the “London Central Hatchery” (p.1). We learn that in the World State human life is created by the means of cloning. This science is by no means an experimental state but the only way of reproduction. Sexuality is no longer necessary for reproduction. Human beings are mass-produced on long conveyerbelts where they are altered for their later tasks in life. They are not only trained for their later job but produced: “’The lower the caste,’ said Mr Foster,’the shorter the oxygen.’(p.11)” This is done to assure that an Alpha is mentaly and physically superior to a Delta. Your skills do not determine which caste you belong to, but your caste determines which skills you will have. Nevertheless, sexuality plays an important role, though it aims only to please. Linda’s problems in the reservation can be traced back to her promiscuity. The World State has thaught her that “everybody belongs to everybody else” (p.109).
Today’s society in most western countries seems to be undecided how to deal with sexuality. Though most people at one point in their life live in monogamous relationships, they have sexual contacts with a variety of partners. It seems like there is an ambiguity in the moral values of our society. Stay with your wife and do not get caught if you do otherwise. The great number of divorced marriages seem to show that a lot of people do not match both aspects of this code of conduct.
As I have said before children are produced in the World State by the means of cloning. During the process the children are subdivided in different castes. As a result the society can affect the number of children belonging to a certain caste like they can controle the production of industril goods. In fact, humans are an industrial good. After the caste-decision is made on an embryo, the growing child is conditioned depending on his caste. Future Epsilons learn that they are glad to be Epsilons because it is far to difficult to be a Delta or a Gamma. There is no such thing like climbing up the ladder or rags to riches. The members of the cast are conditioned not to wish to be something else and produced not to have the abilities to be something else.
In our society there is, of course, no such thing like conditioning. Children are born by their mother, raised and then send to school, where they learn according to their skills. In theory it should not make a difference wheter a child was born in a doctor’s family or in a worker’s family. In reality social background quite often plays an important role. Studies prove that the likelyhood to visit university increases with the income of the family. New ways of financing the higher educational system like the entrance fees do not change but amplify this fact. Though social mobility is possible in Germany it seems like it is getting less likely.
There is a relation between today’s society in Germany and the World State in Brave New World. All the aspects of religion, drugs, sexuality and the class system found in Brave New World somehow apear in today’s society as well. The important difference is that in the novel they are introduced to controle the stability of the society and to prevent another war, while our society seems to produce them from within. I think that it is important to realize that the tendencies exist today like they existed in the 20’s of the last century when they influenced Huxley to write Brave New World.
(1225 words)
by Daniel Eiken
Possible Results: 2. Assignment
2) Explain Linda’s social status in the reservation.
The excerpt is taken from Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World published in 1932. It describes the encounter of two members of the World State, Bernard Marx and Lenina, with Linda and her son John. Linda has been born in the World State and had to stay in the reservation after an accident. Her son John has been born in the reservation but has been received in the World State. Due to various reasons Linda has a very low social status in the reservation.
Linda has come to the reservation like Bernard and Lenina. She accompanied a high-ranking Alpha on a holiday trip. After an accident her compnion left the reservation without her because he thought her to be dead. The inhabitants of the reservation found her and brought her to their village. There they tended her injuries: “Filth, just filth (l.16-17). Linda is disguisted. She shows little gratitude for her saviour but tries to teach the people like children:
“And “Streptocock-Gee to Branbury T, to see a fine bathroom and W.C.” as though they were children.” (l. 18-19) This quotation shows that Linda still feels herself being superior to the members of the reservation. Her tone seems to be a arrogant one. After all the years in the reservation she still inherits the class consciousness of the Brave New World: “But I’m a Beta;” (l. 25)
The people of the reservation are probably not too pleased with this attitude. Especially, since Linda is not able to fit the basic needs of everyday life. “And you’re supposed to mend it if it gets torn.”(l. 24-25) Linda does not only not know how to mend but furthermore opposes the idea of mending torn apparel. Her reaction to medical aid goes the same line. In stead of knowing how to help herself she repeats nursery rhymes in case of need.
Furthermore, Linda is an alcoholic. The paragraph prior to the excerpt descibes her constant use of “mescal” and “peyotl” (p.108 l. 3). The reason for her alcoholism can be traced back to her education in the World State. There it is normal to react to even the slightest disturbance by taking the drug soma. It is as normal as eating and sleeping. Life in the reservation has more than only little disturbing elements. The lack of soma being only one.The fact that Linda is prone to alcohol is a reaction to the cultural differences.
Another important difference, maybe the single most important difference is the different view on sexuality. Linda is bewildered by the moral value of the denizens of the reservation. They have a system of strict monogamy. Furthermore you are thought to be “wicked and anti-social” (l. 46) if you do not obey these rules. Linda learns this code of conduct the hard way. She has sexual intercourse with different men of the village like she is used to it from the World State. The women of the village punish her for that behaviour.Linda still does not understand what the problem is and considers them being mad: “Being mad’s infectious, I believe.” (l. 63-64) But Linda earns not only the contempt of the female denizens of the reservation, vise versa it is the same. Linda despises the women for their motherhood. She compares the women with dogs (l. 54-55) for their great number of children.
To conclude the essay on Linda’s social status in the reservation, we have a look at the three main reasons. First of all, Linda meets the rustic people of the reservation with disrespect and arrogance. Furthermore she is not capable of the basic skills to survive and is an acloholic. The most important reason, nevertheless, is her view on sexuality. The promiscuity she has been conditioned to see as normal threatens the family-based society of the reservation. Therefore Linda is treated like an outsider and kept away from public life.
(645 words)
by Daniel Eiken
Possible Results: 1. Assignment
1) Summarize the excerpt in no more than 200 words.
Linda remembers different aspects of the daily routine in the World State. During her report Lenina is repulsed by the behaviour of Linda. Becoming aware of this Linda apologizes and explains it with the influence of life in the reservation. She describes this life to Lenina and compares it with life in the World State. One aspect she emphasizes is the ethics of interpersonal relationship in the reservation. The strict monogamy confronts Linda with bewilderment as she believes in the moral values of the World State. This promiscuity leads to conflicts with the women of the reservation. She suffers under the moral codex the women try to conduct upon her. One aspect of this code is her motherhood. Still bewildered by her maternal role she realizes that her son comforts her. Furthermore she reflects on her son’s role in the reservation’s society.
(143 words)
by Daniel Eiken
Exam: Brave New World
Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
The excerpt below is taken from Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Answer the three assignments.
Assignments:
1) Summarize the excerpt in no more than 200 words.
2) Explain Linda’s social status in the reservation.
3) Discuss the relation between the World State and our society in Germany in the year 2009.
Poor Linda lifted her
face and with closed eyes ecstatically contemplated the
bright remembered image. “And the river at night,” she
whispered. Great tears oozed slowly out from between her
tight-shut eyelids. “And flying back in the evening from
Stoke Poges. And then a hot bath and vibro-vacuum
massage... But there.” She drew a deep breath, shook
her head, opened her eyes again, sniffed once or twice,
then blew her nose on her fingers and wiped them on the
skirt of her tunic. “Oh, I’m so sorry,” she said in response
to Lenina’s involuntary grimace of disgust. “I oughn’t to
have done that. I’m sorry. But what are you to do when
there aren’t any handkerchiefs? I remember how it used to
upset me, all that dirt, and nothing being aseptic. I had an
awful cut on my head when they first brought me here.
You can’t imagine what they used to put on it. Filth, just
filth. “Civilization is Sterilization,” I used to say to them.
And “Streptocock-Gee to Banbury T, to see a fine
bathroom and a W.C.” as though they were children. But of
course they didn’t understand. How should they? And in
the end I suppose I got used to it. And anyhow, how can
you keep things clean when there isn’t hot water laid on?
And look at these clothes. This beastly wool isn’t like
acetate. It lasts and lasts. And you’re supposed to mend it
if it gets torn. But I’m a Beta; I worked in the Fertilizing
Room; nobody ever taught me to do anything like that. It
wasn’t my business. Besides, it never used to be right to
mend clothes. Throw them away when they’ve got holes
in them and buy new. “The more stitches, the less ritches.”
Isn’t that right? Mending’s antisocial. But it’s all different
here. It’s like living with lunatics. Everything they do is
mad.” She looked round; saw John and Bernard had left
them and were walking up and down in the dust and
garbage outside the house; but none the less confidentially
lowering her voice, and leaning, while Lenina stiffened
and shrank, so close that the blown reek of embryopoison
stirred the hair on her cheek. “For instance,” she hoarsely
whispered, “take the way they have one anoher here. Mad,
I tell you, absolutely mad. Everybody belongs to everyone
else – don’t they? don’t they?” she insisted, tugging at
Lenina’s sleeve. Lenina nodded her averted head, let out
the breath she had been holding and managed to draw
another one, relatively untainted. “well, here,” the other
went on, “nobody’s supposed to belong to more than one
person. And if you have people in the ordinary way, the
others think you’re whicked and anti-social. They hate and
despise you. Once a lot of women came and made a scene
because their men came to see me. Well, why not? And
then they rushed at me ... No, it was too awful. I can’t
tell you about it.” Linda covered her face with her hands
and shuddered. “They’re so hateful, the women here.
Mad, mad and cruel. And of course they don’t know
anything about Malthusian drill, or bottles, or decanting,
or anything of that sort. So they’re having children all the
time – like dogs. It’s too revolting. And to think that I ...
Oh, Ford, Ford, Ford! And yet John was a great comfort
to me. I don’t know what I should have done without him.
Even though he did get so upset whenever a man ...
Quite as a tiny boy, even. Once (but that was when he was
bigger) he tried to kill poor Waihusiwa – or was it Popé? –
just because I used to have them sometimes. Because I
never could make him understand that that was what
civilized people ought to do. Being mad’s infectious, I
believe. Anyhow, John seems to have caught it from the
Indians. Because, of course, he was with them a lot. Even
though they were so beastly to him and wouldn’t let him
do all the things the other boys did. Which was a good
thing in a way, because it made it easier for me to condition
him a little. Though you’ve no idea how difficult that is.
There’s so much one doesn’t know; it wasn’t my business
to know. I mean, when a child asks you how a helicopter
works or who made the world – well, what are you to
answer if you’re a Beta and have worked in the
Fertilizing Room? What are you to answer?”
(762 words)
by Daniel Eiken
Possible Results: 3. Assignment
3) Comment on the writer’s criticism of human beings in their attitude towards nature and the treatment of illnesses and her neglection of ethic aspects.
After reading this article you get the impression that our world and all people living in this world have lost any sense of reality and especially naturalness. People would like to be copied, they would like to be cloned. They think it would be nice to have a person around them looking exactly the same. I think they are only afraid of becoming older and that they could be forgotten after their death. The clone could live on and be a substitute for them. Here, people do not seem to realize the fact that they are not their clone. Of course, a clone looks like the concerned human being but at the same time he/she is a quite different person. Everyone has his/her own character that makes him/her an individual. This means that no copy of a human being could be a suitable substitute for the human being. What about feelings, behaviour, opinion and the soul? Looking at the appearance it will be the same person but inside he/she will be totally different. Nobody is able and nobody should be allowed to copy someone’s identity. Identity belongs to the individual and has to be protected. Everybody’s identity and character have to be protected in the sense of a human being’s dignity. Science should not be allowed to interfere in such private and personal spheres like someone’s identity.
In contrast to this first point, avoiding diseases sounds like a good aspect of genetic engineering, but as Mrs Walter says this cannot be a solution for all diseases and people’s problems in our society. If babies are prepared in a way that they are supposed to be free from ill genes, they still will not be protected from diseases or other problems for their whole lives. Nobody can prepare young adults to be free from HIV forever, for example. It is on these young adults to think of using condoms otherwise they will not have any protection from the life-threatening illness HIV. Nobody else can save people from this disease but the person himself. But in addition to that it is the society’s and parents’ duty to teach children how to protect themselves.
Mrs Walter talks about releasing babies from ill genes before birth but she continues with talking about those almost absurd parents’ wishes that have nothing to do with good health. Parents want scientists to influence their babies’ appearance and accomplishments to create their perfect à la carte babies. People really seem to think they can choose the perfect baby as they choose the best fruit in the supermarket or as they order tea with or without milk. They have more than only a wrong and inhuman attitude towards getting a baby. Of course, it is a good invention that diseases and illnesses can be recognized and sometimes even be cured before a baby’s birth. But in a world where all people are supposed to be perfect, what would parents do if they get to know that their child is disabled? Referring to the article and how the author presents people, no mother would agree to a disabled child as it does not conform to what a perfect baby should be like. According to this, how does our reality look like? It seems as if Natasha Walter has a horrible vision of what our society will be like in the future. Pessimistic or even realistic people may also argue we already live in this horrible society. Human life is not worth as much as it has been worth in past times. Scientists work on cells, on human life, as if it is lifeless material. such work does not suggest researchers having respect for human life what can be seen as problematic in terms of human dignity inherent in every human life. Parents do not have to accept the baby that grows in the mother’s womb. A woman has the right or at least the possibility to decide on her own whether she wants to have her baby or not. It is only some years ago that it was legally permitted to abort disabled babies in
(851 words)
by Sarah Stöppel
Possible Results: 2. Assignment
2) Analyse how Mrs Walter presents this report on the decision of the House of Lords made in February 2002.
What kind of language and point of view does she choose and what is their effect?
Natasha Walter’s article appears to be like a speech to make people think about genetic engineering and its possible dangerous consequences that affect all human beings and the whole world. She uses many stylistic devices to emphasize her statements. She addresses her article to higher educated people as she uses a quite professional language that especially scientists are familiar with. At the same time she gives many explanations of technical terms to make everything more understandable for the normal middle-class readership. Showing her own opinion of genetic engineering and research in general she refers to well-known persons like Aldous Huxley or Robert Lanza. Here, she writes in an ironical way what gives the reader a distinctive impression of her thoughts.
Mrs Walter already shows irony in the first sentence where it says that the decision concerning further genetic engineering has been taken “in the venerable atmosphere of the House of Lords” (l.1). She respects politicians and their decisions but it seems as if she doubts their decisions being good ones. The expressions “House of Lords” and “Lords” are repeated several times. Maybe she wants to stress the Lords’ responsibility for the consequences of genetic engineering in their decisions. In addition to that it shows the powerlessness of ordinary people in contrast to the Lords who decide in favour or against stem-cell research and whose opinion counts in this context. The author describes scientists’ work with cells as “to dabble in cells” (l.4) what appears to be more like playing rather than seriously working. Somehow the author sees the scientists as not being aware of the seriousness of their job when working with living cells belonging to human beings and deserving kind of respect. People are supposed to realize that the Lords’ decision is one concerning life affecting human beings. It is not a game and before allowing limitless genetic engineering we really have to consider carefully what we declare as permitted and what should be avoided to protect human life and dignity. But what has been decided by the House of Lords has been discussed for such a long time and for many people it already belongs to their lives that “such a decision has almost lost its potential to surprise us” (l.6). Therefore it “[hardly feels revolutionary] to allow limited research using cloned human embryos” (ll. 22f.) because progress in genetic engineering is nothing new for people. If the Lords had not agreed to a limited research some scientists would have tinkered with embryos’ cells without political agreement.
The author compares the consequences of the Lords’ decision to an “Aldous Huxley novel” (ll.2f.). Aldous Huxley wrote the novel Brave New World dealing with a world where embryos no longer grow in wombs in their mothers’ bodies but where people are created in factories and where everyone’s life and living conditions are predetermined before birth. The Lords’ decision seems to be the first official step into such a Brave New World. The readers who know this novel are supposed to think about living in such a world without emotional relationships and no possibilities of change in life as everything is predetermined. Furthermore the author mentions possible achievements in genetic engineering as a “tale” (l.5.8) and stresses that these do not have anything to do with reality. Huxley’s Brave New World is not real and it would be horrible for humanity if it became reality. It could also turn out to be horrible if dreams of the perfect à la carte baby were made reality. Here, the author warns her readership not to lose their sense of reality as “what is now possible in genetic science has already way outrun reality” (l.12).
Mrs Walter continues in a way as if she was tired of the development in genetic engineering and tired of the people who adapt to these changes easily and without thinking about their doing. “So much has been talked about designer babies” (l.11) and now people have imaginations of the scientists’ accomplishments that cannot be fulfilled and that have even lost any sense of reality. The author talks about couples who cannot conceive a baby naturally and who think they could order a “perfect à la carte baby” (l.16). This expression is really ironical. People think they can order a baby as they order a meal in a restaurant. In their eyes scientists are magicians who “just wave a wand” (l.18) and fulfill the miracle that people expect them to do. Obviously this shows that many people already lost their sense of reality and do not realize this movement towards absolute control over human life. The author stresses this loss of reality by using a simile that looking “at the reality of the designer baby stories […] is a lot cruder than the science-fiction dreams” (ll.19f.). Nobody realizes that the person himself and his character are less important but that appearance, intelligence and the absence of diseases are more important for couples thinking of children. These changes in people’s minds seem to be strange but they are not. People are used to progress, they are used to the process of genetic engineering because these have become something like routine in our society. Working with cells of embryos “hardly feels revolutionary” (l.23).
In the following part of the article the author illustrates people’s attitudes towards a future based on progressive science. She uses repetitions like people “are beginning to believe” (l.27) that they would like to have control over the whole life. With the help of progress people get to know more and more possibilities to improve life and living conditions and this leads to an endless thirst for new inventions. Their wishes of getting more control and being able to create perfect people become great demands. People want changes and are not satisfied with their actual situation any longer. In this part of the article Mrs Walter writes mainly in the conditional II what emphasizes the irrationality of the people’s demands and what points at the uncertainty if those wishes will ever come true in later times. It is not predictable what the future will be like. “All babies should be perfect” (ll.28f.) but nobody thinks about the consequences when all people will be alike and almost perfect. The author includes herself to the hope of many people “that old age itself should one day pretty soon – and hopefully in time for [their] retirement – be curable” (ll.31f.). She does not judge on genetic engineering and progress in general. In her opinion genetic engineering is inevitable. If people had not been curious and progressive in earlier times we would still be “thinking that 40 was a ripe old age and still having a dozen children in the hope that one would survive until adulthood, no doubt” (ll.35f.). In the text, one can find many rhetorical questions like “where would we be?” (l.35) concerning progress in the past. The author herself always gives the answers to her questions. Her intention does not seem to be supposed to make the readers think about her words to find an own opinion but to listen to her personal opinion and so to make them believe in her words and to convince them. Again she uses repetitions like “we can” (l.37) what gives the impression of the author not really being convinced about possible developments in the future. She seems to be doubtful concerning the future because “we can fantasise that we might become a perfect race” (ll.40f.) but nobody can predict what will happen to them in reality. As I already mentioned before Natasha Walter talks about a well-known person named Robert Lanza and quotes what he said “after his company cloned the first human embryo in the
The author goes on pointing out what she really thinks about Lanza’s opinion by using a lot of examples to stress her own thoughts. Many diseases may be cured by achievements in genetic engineering but scientists cannot help people to care for their individual lives. Diseases are often caused by the people’s unhealthy way of life rather than by ill genes. In general you can say that Mrs Walter wants people to consider their social problems and how to solve them on their own before looking for solutions in genetic engineering. People want to control life, want to change the world, but before they definitely have to change themselves. Scientists can improve babies’ genes that they will be free from diseases but when they grow up to young adults they can disturb their ‘perfect’ predestined bodies themselves. Maybe babies can be formed in a way not to get diseases like diabetes but this scientific interference cannot guarantee a life-long protection from diabetes. In these days, even children get a form of diabetes “known to affect only overweight adults” (l.55) as they are not taught about good and healthy nutrition.
Genetic engineering cannot help in such cases. People themselves have to avoid or at least solve those personally caused problems. Dealing with this problem Mrs Walter writes in a very urgent way. She herself admits that she does not think about what she is doing. Nobody can excuse himself because: “Of course we do!” (l.70): People do care about their health but they prefer doing what they want to do and living how they want to live. They want to live a normal life and this means not to care about everything all the time but to live right now. That is why the author wants her readers to be honest and to realize their problems they have to solve on their own. People want control and power in the world but they do not appear to be willing to do anything for their wishes’ realisation. “They want to eat what they like and do what they like and still live as long as they want” (ll.72f.). The author wants to show that somehow people live in two worlds. On the one side they want changes but they do not want to change themselves and to adopt another world.
Besides social problems, “inequalities in the world” (l.78) cause problems. Here, Mrs Walter describes the contrast between rich and poor countries. In
In the end of her article, Natasha Walter gives a conclusion to her opinion of genetic engineering and instructs the reader how to behave facing such a progress in research. She does not judge on the scientists because “they are just doing what scientists do” (ll.82f.) but she appeals to the readers not to believe in scientists more than in themselves and their personal abilities to change their and others’ lives. As the title already mentioned: science cannot “save us from ourselves” (l.87). (2.008 words)
by Sarah Stöppel
Possible Results: 1. Assignment
1) Point out the helpful and dangerous aspects of genetic engineering as depicted in this text.
Natasha Walter points out the helpful and at the same time dangerous aspects of genetic engineering in a detailed way. Whenever she starts mentioning a helpful aspect concerning genetic engineering, she always continues with a negative or even dangerous one to make people consider the consequences of genetic engineering carefully.
First the author points out that a baby’s genetic material can save its brother or sister. In addition to that a scientist is able to influence the genetic material of any baby releasing it e.g. from the gene “that predisposed [its] mother to Alzheimer’s disease” (ll.9f.) These scientific accomplishments make couples get the shocking idea of having the possibility to get “the perfect à la carte baby” (l.16). Their imaginations no longer contain any sense of reality or rationality as they appear to expect miracles from scientists.
Of course, working with cells of embryos is progressive and without progress the whole world would still be an uncivilized place. People would die earlier because doctors would not have medicine to cure illnesses that come along with old age. Furthermore, babies would die more often at an early age because of too little medical care that can only be developed through progressive research. On the other side the progress, the expanding scientific knowledge, makes people believe that mankind can have control over everything. People want perfectness for others and for themselves. Scientists are able to develop possibilities “to combat disabilities and intractable diseases” (ll.30f.). Illnesses are predictable and so they can be avoided with the right intervention. It is e.g. because of experiments that paraplegics may get the chance to walk again. Additionally, nobody has to be afraid of becoming older as most people are sure that “scientists could already clone dozens of dinky copies of themselves” (ll.13f.)
It seems as if people deeply believe in science and only believe in science. They only wait for scientific help as scientists are supposed to improve life and living conditions in general. But actually, many problems in the world are caused by people themselves and cannot be solved by genetic engineering or expanding scientific knowledge. People have to help themselves because genetic engineering does not mean “to create cloned human beings, but rather to make life-saving therapies for a wide range of human disease conditions” (ll.47f.).
(399 words)
by Sarah Stöppel
Exam: Sach- und Gebrauchstext
Assignments:
What kind of language and point of view does she choose and what is their effect?
Can Science Save Us from Ourselves? Natasha Walter
A decision taken yesterday in the venerable atmosphere of the House of Lords would once have sounded as if it had been plucked straight from an Aldous Huxley novel or a Stanley Kubrick film The Lords in their wisdom decided that scientists should be able to dabble in cells taken from cloned human embryos. But given the current rash of tales about ‘designer’ babies and genetic manipulation, such a decision has almost lost its potential to surprise us. Over the past few days we’ve been treated to the story that one baby will be selected so that its genetic material can save its brother and to the tale that another baby has been born after being selected to be free of the gene that predisposed her mother to Alzheimer’s disease.
So much has been talked about designer babies that the public’s perception of what is now possible in genetic science has already way outrun reality. Many people probably believe that if they were given their way, scientists could already clone dozens of dinky copies of themselves, grow embryos to term in plastic wombs outside women’s bodies, manipulate the eye-colour or piano-playing ability of foetuses and, altogether, provide the perfect à la carte baby service.
Couples who can’t conceive naturally are often shocked to realise that doctors cannot just wave a wand and create a baby for them and that fertility treatments still have high failure rates. When you look at the reality of the designer baby stories, what is in fact going on is a lot cruder than the science-fiction dreams. But all the talk about designer babies means that the decision taken by the House of Lords select committee to allow limited research using cloned human embryos hardly feels revolutionary.
This move promises to put
And why not? If our culture didn’t have this impatient attitude to nature, this arrogant belief that physical and even mental illnesses can always be conquered, where would we be? Still thinking that 40 was a ripe old age and still having a dozen children in the hope that one would survive until adulthood, no doubt. […]
Certainly we in the West can dream of perfect control over our health – we can listen to the tales of dazzling experiments resulting in cloned animals and the possibility of break-throughs that might, one day, make paraplegics walk again and give brain connections back to Ronald Reagan. We can fantasise that we might become a perfect race, each of us taken through a life of absolutely predictable health from a managed birth to a far-off, pain-free trip to the grave.
If you buy into that dream, the Lord’s decision yesterday to allow research using cells from cloned embryos is just part and parcel of a great story of progress. […] As Robert Lanza, the vice-president of medial and scientific development at ACT, said after his company cloned the first human embryo in the
One can’t. But look again at the diseases that he said that cloned-embryo cell research is now expected to deal with: diabetes, strokes, cancer, Aids. And then look at some of the other health stories to have hit the headlines.
The story that, for instance, one in four five-year-old girls is showing early signs of diabetes due to the increase in childhood obesity. Or that a form of diabetes, previously known to affect only overweight adults, is now being identified in children as young as 13 because of their poor diets and lack of exercise. Or that the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, is rising steeply because young people refuse to wear condoms. Or that deaths from alcohol-related car crashes rose sharply last year. Or that young girls and boys are becoming increasingly heavy drinkers. Or that smoking has increased among people aged from 16 to 19.
This is where the dream of total control falls down – not in the achievements of scientists, but in the messy reality of our lives. What do we really want? We may think we want perfect health, a life lived in absolute control. And when we make rational choices for ourselves or for others, of course that’s what we choose. But then we pour another glass to take the evening into a lovely haze, we strap ourselves into steel cages and roar around the country at 90 miles an hour, or we ride a wave of urgent passion without even remembering that packet of condoms sitting in the bathroom cabinet. Of course we do!
For all the trendy talk of holistic health care, what most people in the West want is the opposite - they want to eat what they like and do what they like and still live as long as they want. That’s why the reality of our lives so often falls so far short of the dreams of both science and science fiction. Neither takes account of the messy irrationality of human desires – desires that seem to get even more messy and irrational, as our theoretical ability to control our lives increases.
Nor, of course, does the dream of total control take any account of the unspeakable inequalities in the world. Because it beggars belief that, while we have worked out how to save a baby in
That’s not to say that the scientists are on the wrong track. Surely they are just doing what scientists do – expanding our knowledge and spelling out the secrets of life, day by day.
But perhaps we should put their glittering achievements into perspective. Because, although scientists might one day be able to save us even from our genes, they still won’t be able to save us from ourselves.
(From: Natasha Walter, ‘Science Can’t Save Us from Ourselves’, The Independent, 28 February, 2002)
by Sarah Stöppel
14. Justify
1. Definition:
Show adequate grounds for decisions or conclusions.
2. Examples:
-You are the principal of a school. Justify your decision to forbid smoking on the school premises.
-Write a letter to the editor of ‘The Independent’ in answer to this article. Refer to whatever you think are the most important aspects in connection to the handling and scientific progress of genetic engineering and justify your views.
-Death penalty is still a common phenomenon in many US states. How do politicians justify their refusal to abolish death penalty? Include your own opinion into your answer and justify your view on the topic.
-These days, drug abuse among young adults and even children is one of the most important topics our society is confronted with. How can we stop young people to drink alcohol at a very young age? Justify your ideas.
3. Description:
Write down your own view/opinion on a given topic. Give reasons for your decision or conclusion you draw according to the text. You have to justify your opinion by giving good reasons for or against the topic to make your view transparent for the reader.
4. Useful Vocabulary:
-To give grounds/reasons for a point of view
-To give a justification for…
-To present an explanation of…
-The government justifies its decision on two grounds, namely…
-I agree with the writer’s argument that…is justified in so far as…
-The justification for this policy is said to be…, but this is not the case.
-To begin with, it is undeniable that…
-On the contrary, experience suggests that…is the case.
-The author’s position is less a justification than an excuse.
-The fact (of the matter) is…
-To demonstrate/ show that a decision/ opinion
is justified/reasonable
by Sarah Stöppel
13. Assess
1. Definition:
Consider in a balanced way the arguments for and against something.
2. Examples:
Assess the importance of common standards in education.
Assess the importance of democracy for economic growth.
3. Description:
This operator verb focuses on the arguments for and against something. You have to consider advantages and disadvantages of a topic and present them in a clear and structured manner. After a clear presentation of the arguments for and against or advantages and disadvantages of something you have to consider both sides. It is important to present your own opinion at the end of the assessment. Furthermore, your opinion should be balanced and incorporate the arguments.
4. Helpful Vocabulary:
-When assessing the problem of..., it es necessary to take the following factors into account before making a final judgment.
-An assessment of ...presupposes a judgment of several factors.
-I share the author’s assessment of ...in so far as/ to the extent that....,but in my opinion he underestimates/ exaggerates/ places too much emphasis on...
5. Advice
In modern English assess and evaluate are synonymous. Their use as an operator verb differs, nevertheless. When asked to write an evaluation you do not have to come to a final conclusion. Meanwhile, when asked to write an assessment you have to formulate your opinion based on your arguments.
by Daniel Eiken
12. Interpret
1. Definition:
Clearify the meaning of something and express your own opinion on it.
2. Examples:
Interpret the message the author wants to convey.
Interpret the protagonists wish to die.
3. Description:
This operator verb focusses on the meaning the author wants to convey. You have to analyse this meaning and explain it in a broader context. It is crucial to understand not only the text or excerpt, but also the circumstances that lead the writer to compose the text. Furthermore, you have to include your opinon as an interpretation is always personal opinion. Nobody, but the author, knows exactly what the author wants to say.
4. Helpful Vocabulary:
-The author attacks the idea that...
-The author criticises the atitude of...
-The author neglects the fact that...
-The author defends the argument that...
-The author has a emotional attitude towards...
-His/ Her view is prejudiced when he says that ...
by Daniel Eiken
11. Contrast
1. Definition:
Emphasize the difference between two or more things.
2. Examples:
-Contrast the author’s ideas of human aggression with the theories of aggression you have read about.
-Contrast the author’s concept with ideas you have discussed in class, or one of the character’s feelings with a character’s feelings you are familiar with from your lessons.
-Explore the contrasting views of the politicians according to needs of people in economically poor countries.
-Contrast the role of women in India with the role of women in Western societies and think of reasons why women still do not always have the same possibilities in life as men.
3. Description:
Present both of the contrasting concepts or ideas talked about in the text. Go on contrasting several significant differences in detail to show the basic divergence between the two concepts/ideas. Come to a conclusion what you think is the most convincing concept/idea. Give reasons for your decision.
4. Useful Vocabulary:
-To contrast one opinion/position/view with another
-To point out the difference(s) between…and…
-To differentiate between…and…
-The contrast between…and…shows that…
-In contrast to...this seems to be…
-Contrary to what she promised,…
-The author draws a contrast between…and…but this is misleading. In my opinion, the similarities are greater than the differences. For example,…
-Any contrast between…on the one hand, and…on the other, should focus on the question of…
-Unlike the native-born American, the Asian employee did not dare to contradict her boss.
-His opinion differs from…to the extent that…
-It is somewhat different with…
by Sarah Stöppel
Dienstag, 26. Mai 2009
10. Comment
1. Definition:
State clearly your opinion on the topic in question and support your views with evidence.
2. Examples:
-Comment on the suggestion made in the text that a ‘lack of women in the armed forces demonstrates a weakness in the role of women in society’.
-Comment on the thesis expressed in line 35f.
-Comment on the writer’s criticism of human beings in their attitude towards nature and the treatment of illnesses and her neglection of ethic aspects.
-A firm has a right to know what kind of person a manager is. Comment on how much intrusion into the private sphere of a person you would think tolerable and/or necessary in times of globalization.
3. Description:
Here, you are definitely supposed to present your own opinion on a given topic. You always have to strengthen your arguments for your point of view so that a possible opponent does not have any chance to undermine your position.
4. Advice:
You will often be asked to write your comment in form of a letter to an editor or a reader’s letter. Be careful that such a letter should contain:
-Writer’s/sender’s address
-Date
-Addressee
-Salutation
-Body of the letter
-Complimentary close
Be careful with formal characteristics! Use phrases like these:
-Dear Sir or Madam
-I refer to your leader about…
-Sir or Madam – I refer to your leader about…
The letter should be brief and informative so that it could really be published in a newspaper. Use formal style in a comment!
by Sarah Stöppel
9. Explain
1. Definition:
Describe and define in a precise way the causes of a certain problem.
2. Examples:
Explain the protagonist’s obsession for his girlfriend.
Explain how the statistics support the author’s opinion.
3. Description:
This operator verb focuses on a precise description and definition. The topic of the description can vary from as much as an cartoon to a chart or statistics. You should concentrate on two aspects. First, you should cover all aspects. Secondly, you should try to be as accurate as possible about the information. The later is specifically important when working with statistics and charts.
4. Helpful Vocabulary:
-The line graph deals with/ shows the relationship between...and...
-The bar chart compares...and...
-The pie chart deals with/ shows the distribution of...
-The line rises gradually/ slowly/ sharply/ steeply/ fastly and peaks at/ reaches a peak at...
-The line falls...and bottoms out at...
-The pie chart is divided into five segments...
-The statistics present data on /about...
-According to official/UN...statistics...
-The data is statistically unsignificant.
by Daniel Eiken
8. Discuss
1. Definition:
Investigate or examine a topic by means of argumentation.
2. Examples:
Discuss the implications of globalisation as descibed in the article.
3. Description:
This operator verb focuses on a complete presentation of an issue. Starting from an article or excerpt you have to construct an argumentation on a specific topic. Even though you may find some arguments already mentioned in the text you could go beyond the excerpt and add arguments you may know from classroom or other sources like television or the internet. Remember to sum up your arguments when you are done presenting them.
4. Helpful Vocabulary:
-It is important/ useful to start/ begin by saying/ stating that...
-There are a number of issues to consider here.
-There are several questions to think about...
-First,.../ Secondly,.../ Thirdly,...
-Finally,.../ Last of all
-In addition,...
-Moreover,...
-Furthermore,...
-Alternatively,..
-Despite (+ Gerund)
-Even though
The result/ The effect is...
-To conclude...
-To sum it all up...
-On the whole, it can be said that...
by Daniel Eiken
7. Compare
1. Definition:
Point out similarities and differences.
2. Examples:
Compare the two shopkeepers’s attitudes to shoplifting.
Compare Thatcher’s and Blair’s views on welfare.
3. Description:
This operator focuses on the relation of two persons, groups or texts concerning a certain topic. The first step is to scan the text or the excerpt of the text for relevant information. It is crucial that you stick to a presentation of your results. You must not evaluate the similarities or differences.
4. Useful Vocabulary:
-Compare a view/ attitude...with another view/ attitude
-Differentiate between ...and...in so far as
-Weigh/balance the differences/ similarities between ...and...
by Daniel Eiken
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)