deadline date of : Oct.31st [way late, but here!]
Reading Assignments of: Ethics textbook chapter 6; Concise Guide textbook chapter 4--
As I read ch.6 of the Ethics text, I was amazed (for lack of a better word)by how the author, Paul Dombrowski, "hit the nail on the head"when he stated, "{W}hen someone contracts lung cancer, death follows months or years of painful, progressive debilitation and destruction. These deaths are often lonely, witnessed only by nurses, and perhaps a few family members." I certainly know all of this to be true: my dear mother died of a smoking-related cancer. It is quite horrible for me, as her daughter--more so for her: she was the one dying.
Anyhow, Mr. Dombrowski mentions, under the sub-heading, "Cause", of how long a product may 'take' to affect one's body. The 'why' of a cause of a disorder or disease may not be revealed until decacades later: what will be the effects of 'Nutra-Sweet' [aspartame, sp?] on the nest generation of yet-to-be children? It may not be 'discovered' in our life-times, but the cause-and-effect connection is there, potentially.
Mr. Dombrowski is a good writer [and occasionally humorous]. An instance of this is on page 155, where he writes of no 'shading' nor of sidestepiing the issues of the tobacco industry basically hushing up the facts their products killing/injuring folks.
In logical reasoning, a gentleman goes by the name of John Stuart Mill, had developed 1 of 4 methods. "Concomitant variation" it is called-- as I understand it, is a decrease of one independent variable [in a logical sense, not a mathematical one--I don't think?] leads to a decrease of a dependent variable: one causes the other .
Thank goodness Mr. Dombrowski chose to limit this chapter to only on those tobacco products are smoked [versus chewed].
Another question posed in the reading: how does the cigarette smke cause cancer? Over the course of the 6 years that this textbook had been published, scientists are still researching the 'why' to get a better understanding of cancer.
I am indeed amazed of how humans caan and do use their intellect. A prime example of this is noted in our textbook, of a Dr, John Snow. Back in the mid 1800's, in London, a disease called cholera was ravaging neighborhoods, killing a great folks. This Dr. Snow had observed that the numbers of people who got cholera had increased after drinking from the common-to-all-the-neighborhood water pump. He had the handle removed from the pump and numbers decreased. Of course, this was way before the discovery of bacteria and other microbes that cause disease. But Dr. Snow was a pioneer in the observation aspect of the scientific/ medical field.
I do understand Mr. Dombrowski's point of the sophists--at times they could be considered abit of a risk to 'believe' their claims. The connection Mr. Dombrowski make with the tobacco industry and those that propragate the 'information' about smoking and health, is very clear-cut: they are sophists. The tobacco industry would [and has] continued with the debates about smoking with the intention of winning the debate for the sake of the debate. After each claim from the scientific community regarding the connection between smoking and cancer, the tobaccao business always gets on the offensive.
The paragraph Mr. Dombrowski quoted [on page 159],I was befuddled by it!! It seemed, and I believe that this report, was to be intentionally confusing, by the tobacco industry. And the wild thing this report was published in the year of my birth--nearly 50 years ago! 1958! The tobacco industry knew 48 + years ago, to decieve the American public! As well as discredit the very credible medical research .
650 million current smokers world-wide die of preventable deaths, according the World Health Organization{WHO}.
Under the sub-heading, in our textbook, of "Documents", Mr. Dombrowski brings up some [more!!] disturbing points: the many ways the tobacco industry has "gotten away with murder". The way this specific business has twisted a lie['smoking cigarettes causes no harm] into a 'false truth' (my term). As Iread the beginning of this section, I got more angrier at the tobacco industry!! And, in some ways, most especially, in regards to being secretive, using language within their documentation the industry is very similar to the Nazi Party of 1930's Germany: they each twisted the truth to suit their situation.
One of the many sad points of this whole issue is of those foks who work in this industry. I'm not talking of those "muckety-mucks" on the corporate levels, but those that actually are working directly with this product: they are, as well as those who suffer from the tobacco physical effects, suffer financially, if any of the lawsuits against the tobacco companies ever reaches any conclusions.
All of the documents Mr. Dombrowski cites are certainly technical commications; however, those that were written (or co-written) by and/or for the tobacco industry seem so outrageous in their 'health' claims, it is hard for me to view them as legitimate technical communications.
