Ha Huy Anh Pham
Daria Oprean
Pham:
"Absolutely agree with you that curiosity is the thing that drives knowledge, and the accumulation of mankind's knowledge only started when some primates started to experiment with sticks and stones. About the moral of knowledge acquisition through experimenting on animals, I feel like we're just being selfish if we forbid such experiments. If experimenting on lab mouses and rabbits is condemned because this action causes pain and suffering to the poor animals, then do we have to revert back to testing on even smaller animals? But then arises the question, which is when does consciousness and the perception of pain start emerging? Does it already begin in simple living beings such as worms? Do plants also feel pain? How do we even know for certain that they do? Just because they don't scream when we chop them down doesn't mean they don't feel pain, it just means they don't scream in human language. Which brings me to the idea that we as humans are inherently selfish, no matter what we do. The empathy we have for such poor beings only materialize out of evolution, which might have allowed for a higher chance of our survival in the wilderness. I for one feel a lot less pity for a sewer rat than, say, a hamster. This I also call selfish. We forbid the experimentation of animals because it brings us discomfort and a guilty conscience? But what about the billions of animals being killed in nature without human intervention? Should we also save them? On the other hand, by stopping experimentation on animals, we slow down our own technological progress, research can't go on as smoothly as before and as a result less human beings are saved. If you had to choose between the life of a thousand rabbits and the life of a human being, which one would you choose? Anyway my point is we cannot achieve anything if we don't sacrifice anything. There will always be a conflict of interests as long as we are still living on this earth and the best we can do is to choose the lesser of various evils. Same goes for knowledge, for example there wouldn't be satellites and space shuttles today if a certain guy didn't stand up against the catholic church a long time ago. Just my two cents."
"Absolutely agree with you that curiosity is the thing that drives knowledge, and the accumulation of mankind's knowledge only started when some primates started to experiment with sticks and stones. About the moral of knowledge acquisition through experimenting on animals, I feel like we're just being selfish if we forbid such experiments. If experimenting on lab mouses and rabbits is condemned because this action causes pain and suffering to the poor animals, then do we have to revert back to testing on even smaller animals? But then arises the question, which is when does consciousness and the perception of pain start emerging? Does it already begin in simple living beings such as worms? Do plants also feel pain? How do we even know for certain that they do? Just because they don't scream when we chop them down doesn't mean they don't feel pain, it just means they don't scream in human language. Which brings me to the idea that we as humans are inherently selfish, no matter what we do. The empathy we have for such poor beings only materialize out of evolution, which might have allowed for a higher chance of our survival in the wilderness. I for one feel a lot less pity for a sewer rat than, say, a hamster. This I also call selfish. We forbid the experimentation of animals because it brings us discomfort and a guilty conscience? But what about the billions of animals being killed in nature without human intervention? Should we also save them? On the other hand, by stopping experimentation on animals, we slow down our own technological progress, research can't go on as smoothly as before and as a result less human beings are saved. If you had to choose between the life of a thousand rabbits and the life of a human being, which one would you choose? Anyway my point is we cannot achieve anything if we don't sacrifice anything. There will always be a conflict of interests as long as we are still living on this earth and the best we can do is to choose the lesser of various evils. Same goes for knowledge, for example there wouldn't be satellites and space shuttles today if a certain guy didn't stand up against the catholic church a long time ago. Just my two cents."
Daria:
"To be perfectly honest, when I was thinking about knowledge, my first instinct was to think about spiritual knowledge, critical knowledge and emotional intelligence, things that did not necessarily fit into the “construct” of knowledge or “intelligence”. So I believe there’s different perspectives to knowledge. There is knowledge as awareness, there is knowledge as evolution, as experiences, as reflection, as progress. However the one thing they all have in common is curiosity. I really do believe that once you stop asking yourself questions you are a dead man. Questions are essential, especially in present day forecasts. You have to question what you read, fight what you have been indoctrinated to believe, you have to ask yourself “How can I help”, How can I change and adapt for the scope of progress? Every person who ever got to a conclusion or a solution, started off by asking himself a question. Now of course, we also have to point out that, yes knowledge is a certain power. And again, a power can be abused. There has been incredible amounts of evidence on death of morals for scientific purposes even though in the Nuremberg Code, whose first principle asserts that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential”. From extreme cases like Mengele to doctors doing gynaecological research on sedated women, many people seem to believe that there are grounds for doing non consensual research.
But then, mix knowledge and technology together, and you get an even bigger yet vulnerable result. From genetically modified tomatoes and chihuahuas (to the point that their hips are so tiny that giving birth would kill them), to “designer” babies. However, there is a big debate in my head about whether we could have gotten as fast to where we are today if certain boundaries would not have been crossed. Because everything has a cost right? So in order for me to to do my makeup, I have to kill rabbits, in order for me to take my medicine, I have to support large-scale human testing and exploit medical staff. Are we putting blood money into pockets or satisfying some sick curiosity? After all it is about money, because the non destructive solutions that exist are controlled by the same companies who tell you about the new vitamin you need. I remember going to Romania that I was so angry because in every TV break, there were at least 3 commercials selling drugs. The other one was political and the last was about the new gambling app. So it’s really hard to navigate through this either way, but imagine what happens when huge amounts of people don’t ask themselves questions and believe all the nonsense they read, or see. And let’s face it the conclusions and outcome of large scale intelligence factories are always subjective to the way people in power decide it to affect the world. History is always written from one side of a story, (the story which makes each country look the best), and it’s your job to question it.
That’s kind of what I did with my photograph for this value. First, I wanted to go to the tropical institute and take some images there, but the responses were all negative due to corona, so yesterday I went to the Hague. And there is a little aqua museum called SeaWorld, so you can observe and get empirical evidence of what you heard about. However, the front of the building was decorated with an image of some trees and seagulls, Sand and moss so what was supposed to imply some thought to a body of water. Now, Dutch people seem to have an affinity in a decorative sense for life sized models of bulldogs, sheep, and other animals in bright colours such as blue, yellow and red. So in front before the wall with seagulls, there stood a multicoloured cow, on fake grass which was bending at her feet. And it made me laugh a little bit, how could you put a multicoloured cow as a symbol for SeaWorld, which is a very specific subject? It was a small national imprint on on a very neutral piece of information, therefore stressing the idea of subjectivity in knowledge. Fun fact: 50% of American kids believe there are purple cows. Think about that:))) How do you see this subject? What are your thoughts and how do you stay with your head above the water in the flow of information?"
"To be perfectly honest, when I was thinking about knowledge, my first instinct was to think about spiritual knowledge, critical knowledge and emotional intelligence, things that did not necessarily fit into the “construct” of knowledge or “intelligence”. So I believe there’s different perspectives to knowledge. There is knowledge as awareness, there is knowledge as evolution, as experiences, as reflection, as progress. However the one thing they all have in common is curiosity. I really do believe that once you stop asking yourself questions you are a dead man. Questions are essential, especially in present day forecasts. You have to question what you read, fight what you have been indoctrinated to believe, you have to ask yourself “How can I help”, How can I change and adapt for the scope of progress? Every person who ever got to a conclusion or a solution, started off by asking himself a question. Now of course, we also have to point out that, yes knowledge is a certain power. And again, a power can be abused. There has been incredible amounts of evidence on death of morals for scientific purposes even though in the Nuremberg Code, whose first principle asserts that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential”. From extreme cases like Mengele to doctors doing gynaecological research on sedated women, many people seem to believe that there are grounds for doing non consensual research.
But then, mix knowledge and technology together, and you get an even bigger yet vulnerable result. From genetically modified tomatoes and chihuahuas (to the point that their hips are so tiny that giving birth would kill them), to “designer” babies. However, there is a big debate in my head about whether we could have gotten as fast to where we are today if certain boundaries would not have been crossed. Because everything has a cost right? So in order for me to to do my makeup, I have to kill rabbits, in order for me to take my medicine, I have to support large-scale human testing and exploit medical staff. Are we putting blood money into pockets or satisfying some sick curiosity? After all it is about money, because the non destructive solutions that exist are controlled by the same companies who tell you about the new vitamin you need. I remember going to Romania that I was so angry because in every TV break, there were at least 3 commercials selling drugs. The other one was political and the last was about the new gambling app. So it’s really hard to navigate through this either way, but imagine what happens when huge amounts of people don’t ask themselves questions and believe all the nonsense they read, or see. And let’s face it the conclusions and outcome of large scale intelligence factories are always subjective to the way people in power decide it to affect the world. History is always written from one side of a story, (the story which makes each country look the best), and it’s your job to question it.
That’s kind of what I did with my photograph for this value. First, I wanted to go to the tropical institute and take some images there, but the responses were all negative due to corona, so yesterday I went to the Hague. And there is a little aqua museum called SeaWorld, so you can observe and get empirical evidence of what you heard about. However, the front of the building was decorated with an image of some trees and seagulls, Sand and moss so what was supposed to imply some thought to a body of water. Now, Dutch people seem to have an affinity in a decorative sense for life sized models of bulldogs, sheep, and other animals in bright colours such as blue, yellow and red. So in front before the wall with seagulls, there stood a multicoloured cow, on fake grass which was bending at her feet. And it made me laugh a little bit, how could you put a multicoloured cow as a symbol for SeaWorld, which is a very specific subject? It was a small national imprint on on a very neutral piece of information, therefore stressing the idea of subjectivity in knowledge. Fun fact: 50% of American kids believe there are purple cows. Think about that:))) How do you see this subject? What are your thoughts and how do you stay with your head above the water in the flow of information?"