![vexing notion definition vexing notion definition](https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2021/02/17/NCOD/fc41e14d-5f2d-412d-8969-cbd5dd311576-USATSI_15579992.jpg)
In ethical reflections on new technologies, a specific type of argument often pops up, which criticizes scientists for “playing God” with these new technological possibilities. The results of this study may help to structure the academic debate and contribute to a better understanding of moral concerns that are associated with the key aspects of the ethical theories of consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics. Articles addressing the act (57%) dealt with the value of naturalness, the value of biotic entities, and conceptual reductionism, whereas articles addressing the actor (43%) dealt with virtues related to the handling of risks and the application of GM crops. Articles addressing consequences (84%) dealt with general ecological and risk concerns or discussed specific ecological issues about the use of GM crops. Three types of moral concerns were used to structure the normative statements, moral notions, and moral issues found in the articles: concerns addressing consequences of the use of GM crops, concerns addressing the act (the technique itself), and concerns addressing the virtues of an actor. Overall, 113 articles from 15 ecology, environmental ethics, and multidisciplinary science journals were systematically reviewed. Environmental ethical aspects in the publications were investigated. This study provides a comprehensive overview of the moral reasoning on the use of GM crops expressed in academic publications from 1975 to 2008.
![vexing notion definition vexing notion definition](https://scallywagandvagabond.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/NYC-Public-Theater-Delta-Bank-of-America-sponsorships2-300x200.jpg)
Important issues are whether the release of GM crops is beneficial or harmful for the environment and therefore acceptable, and whether the modification of plants is ethically permissible per se. The use of genetically modified plants in agriculture (GM crops) is controversially discussed in academic publications. UnderstoodĪs such, this indicates that debate continues over the purpose of art and technology, and the place of humanity within the natural environment, and that a kind of traditional teleological virtue ethics still exerts a significant influence on popular conceptions of the moral issues underlying Intuitions of this kind often express a concern for the virtue of, and doubt about the intentions of, the agent whose acts are described in these terms, and that these concepts are best understood as part of an historical and cultural continuum specific to the Western tradition. Of these phrases put forward by bio-ethicists Ruth Chadwick and John Harris and argue that the concepts 'playing God' and 'vexing nature' are best understood as an expression of a moral intuition that is both significant and deserving of serious philosophical attention. I examine, in detail, the interpretations To the notion that certain acts constitute instances of 'playing God' or interfering in the natural order, philosophers often deny that such phrases have any application to the central ethical issues in the areas where they are most commonly applied. In this paper I examine the twin concepts of 'playing God', and its secular equivalent that which I term for the purpose of this discussion 'vexing Nature' as they relate to arguments against (or for) certain human technological actions and behaviours.