Reproduction in Humans, Using Artificial Methods Free Essay Example, 2500 words

IVF or in-vitro fertilization is defined as the fusion of human reproductive cells in an extracorporeal way . In this process, the egg is fertilized outside the ovum under in-vitro conditions within a container, which is tube-shaped, and made of glass or resin. For this very reason, babies conceived in this manner are very often referred to as test-tube babies. The first test-tube baby to be born was Louise Brown, in 1978, and after her birth human IVF-ET has evolved to become a standard medical practice for the treatment of many types of human fertility (Wolf, 1). Here the female partner s ovulation is controlled externally by administering hormones. Once the eggs are ready for fertilization they are collected from the ovary by inserting a needle that is guided by an ultrasound technique to reach the ovaries. Once the needle reaches the ovary it collects the follicular fluid. This fluid is then sent to the lab where around 10-30 eggs are removed. After the eggs are selected, t hey are prepared for fertilization by removing their surrounding cells. The sperms from the partner or donor cells are then incubated with the prepared egg cells, for about 18-20 hours, with a ratio of a sperm cell to egg cell at 75000:1.We will write a custom essay sample on Reproduction in Humans, Using Artificial Methods or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page Artificial insemination (AI): Artificial insemination, as the very name suggests, is the process of impregnating a female by external methods that are artificial in nature. A definition of AI would be as follows artificial insemination is an impregnation not by means of natural intercourse, but by means of mechanical, artificial aids such as injecting the semen or sperm directly into the female sex organ by the use of a tuberculin syringe (Nabor-Nery, 81).

Humans Nature - Good or Bad Essay - 1132 Words

Human Nature Good or Bad? Whether human beings are instinctually good or evil in an elementary natural state is a question that has been boggling the minds of even the greatest philosophers. There is a spectrum of theories that support both good and evil within the human race, each with valid points that explains the range of our interests, being either for ourselves or for others. However, my personal stance is the sensible theory of Altruism. Past experiences and observations allow me to take the stance, and support the argument that humans are caring and genuinely good individuals and have the will and desire to help those around them. Philosophers such as Mengzi (4th Century BCE) also known as Mencius in the West, explains†¦show more content†¦These ongoing debates continue into literature and are for example the two philosophical authors Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Joseph Butler (1692-1752). One philosopher fighting for the truth of the evil nature within humans, and the other rebutting for t he good. Hobbes’ book the â€Å"Leviathan† expresses harsh outlines for the nature of human and describes the human life as, â€Å"solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.† 1 He concluded that humans are antisocial, and that cooperation between individuals or groups is nothing but self-interest. Joseph Butler however, wanted to reestablish his belief and published the book â€Å"Fifteen Sermons Preached at Roll Chapel.† His goal was to prove that human nature included positive elements. Within his book, Butler states that humans have varying characteristics pertaining to their nature and this encompasses a measure of self-interest. This self-interest is a natural attribute that roots back to the human animalistic nature of â€Å"survival of the fittest.† This self-interest is also a human quality that does not conflict with benevolence. Butler arranged these human attributes into a hierarchy with the top being conscience. In regards to conscience, Hobbes maintained the opinion that acts of kindnessShow MoreRelatedHuman Nature Is Good Or Bad?1484 Words   |  6 PagesJesus Robledo Prof. Hudley English 121-001 April 17 2016 Human Nature Human Nature, human nature to me is how a person gives their life meaning by applying different believes to it, and then continue living their life based on them. No human is perfect nor good or bad. Throughout the history of humanity, our way of thinking, and believes have evolved in some way. Human nature took its turns when everyone started creating new beliefs back then. An example of differentRead MoreHuman Nature Is Good Or Bad?909 Words   |  4 PagesHuman nature is referred to distinguishing characteristics; including ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving. Which humans tend to have naturally. As human beings we are taught moralities at a young age. We are taught whether an action is good or bad. So as humans, are we inherently good or bad? If we are taught what to be. Not only we are taught, but we are shaped by the world around us. I believe that we are all inherently good to begin with. Those who are â€Å"evil† only do so because they have beenRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s King Of The Good And Bad Of Human Nature1338 Words   |  6 PagesIn William Shakespeare’s play King Lear, similar to most of his pieces, he manages to build an intricate storyline, weaving in and out of the good and bad of human nature. Shakespeare also highlights the development of identity in results to hardship and utilizes characters, such as Lear the protagonist to create emphasis. Lear, who is ridden with a naà ¯ve and un-insightful personality plunges himself head first into an avoidable misfortune leads him to the loss of his kingship, his relationship withRead MoreHuman Nature : What Makes A Human Person?1511 Words   |  7 PagesHuman nature, the essence of what makes a human person what they are, is something that everybody has. Every person is innately a person, but how they put their personhood into action is the biggest indicator of their character, or the projection of a person’s human nature. At their core there is human nature, but their actions are what direct this source of humanity. The quality of someone’s actions is shaped by their environment and sometimes their biological makeup as well. Human nature doesRead MoreInflunce of Human Nature and Politics in a City1615 Words   |  7 Pageslives in. In this paper the character of human nature and politics will be discussed in how a city is ought to be by the influence of human nature and politics. Firstly, the influence of human nature on politics will be looked at, for example according to Plato on behalf of Socrates; he claims that a just soul creates a just society, where it is human nature to be just, that influences in creating a just political system. Secondly, politics influences human nature, where in the republic when the discussionRead More The Philosophies Are Confucianism, Mohism And Legalism1497 Words   |  6 Pagesopinion of human nature. Chinese philosophy began in the fifth century BC with Confucius and changed and evolved as other philosophers built off Confucian ideas and challenged Confucian ideas. Confucius, Mencius, and Xunzi are three different philosophers from Chinese history who have three opposing views in their philosophical ideas of society and human nature. These three philosophies are Confucianism, Mohism and Legalism. Ancient Chinese philosophers built their views of human nature off of theRead MoreThe Nature of Death Essay1508 Words   |  7 PagesHuman beings often have preconceived notions or fears regarding the abstract idea of death. Two Hellenistic philosophers Epicurus and Epictetus take very different approaches to prove that death is insignificant and nothing to worry about. Epicurus argues that death is the unequivocal end of our existence, and Epictetus claims it is something that we have no control over. Both examine the nature of death in an attempt to achieve ataraxia or a tranquil state of mind. However, Epicurus and EpictetusRead MoreThe Mencius-Xunzi Debate in Early Confucian Ethnics Essay1082 Words   |  5 Pagesachieve this goal. Yet, instead of supporting each other, Mengzi and Xunzi have made contradictory arguments on human nature and cultivation of moral elites . Previous researchers have found that Mengzi, as the second most influential Confucian philosopher , maintains that human nature is good , whereas Xunzi, who shaped the Confucianism that followed him , claims that human nature is bad . This sharp contrast may result from the fact that both Mengzi and Xunzi live in the Warring States period, inRead MoreContradictions and Paradoxes in the Human Soul in â€Å"the Human Abstract†, by William Blake1110 Words   |  5 Pagesand paradoxes in the human soul in â€Å"The Human Abstract†, by William Blake Before being good or bad, human beings are just humans who have to live with their own nature, which they sometimes cannot control. Man can do good or evil but he always makes it with a unique purpose, his personal satisfaction, because it is simply in his nature. Thus, human beings aware of good and evil are confronted with conflicting choices but they never act against their will. The poem, â€Å"The Human Abstract†, writtenRead MoreThe Effects Of Bailos On Human Nature1481 Words   |  6 PagesEarth due to its human nature because the humans choose how they want to be, either good or evil nature based on education, family, and their interactions. Through our journey back down to Balios, we have found that human nature is neither good nor evil like Kao Tzu explained. Human beings have higher education standards which starts at a young age and can possibly go forever. They have so called leaders that they named teachers. These teachers help motivate humans to achieve good things as much

The Russian Revolution, c. 1910 †1924, Sources Question Free Essays

1) This question is about Russia before 1914. Look carefully at sources (A) to (F) and then answer questions (a) to (d) below. a) Study source A. We will write a custom essay sample on The Russian Revolution, c. 1910 – 1924, Sources Question or any similar topic only for you Order Now What can you learn from source A about the situation in Russia before 1914? From source A we can learn that the situation in Russia before 1914 was very alarming. Strikes went up from 2000 in 1912 to 4000 in 1914. Some strikers demanded trade union rights and more and more people were becoming involved with fights with the government. 270 miners were shot dead during the strikes in Lena goldfields. b) Study sources A, B and C. i) Does source C support the evidence of sources A and B about the situation in Russia before 1914? Explain your answer. Source C supports the evidence of source A by saying that there was an increase of tension. This is shown in source a by the increasing amount of strikes and the fact that many people had been shot during the Lena goldfield massacre. Source C also supports source A because it shows that more and more people were involved in fights with the government, as source C says, ‘People can be heard speaking of the government in the sharpest of tones.’ Source C supports the evidence of source B because the number of strikes and strikers in factories increased during 1910 and 1914, again, as source C says, ‘People can be heard speaking of the government in the sharpest of tones.’ ii) Why were there many strikers in Russia in the years 1910-1914? Use sources A, B and C, and your own knowledge, to explain your answer. There were there many strikers in Russia in the years 1910-1914 because people were firstly becoming less scared of the Okhrana, so they were not very afraid to voice their opinion. A lot of people may not have liked how the government was running Russia; the only way they would be heard would have been through a strike. More people were also coming together, as most of them worked in horrible working conditions, with very little pay, long hours and a disturbing working environment, they must have decided to go on strike. Sales of vodka, food and fuel dropped drastically, this may have also cased many strikes as many people would have needed the money from these sales. Also, from source B we see that in 1910 the number of strikers in factories was 222, in 1914 the number of strikers in factories was 3534. The increase in strikers in factories from 1910 to 1914 may have been caused by the increased size of the factories. The factories must have employed more people thought 1910 and 19 14, so the number of strikers must obviously increase. C) Study sources D and E. How useful are sources D and E as evidence of support for the Russian monarchy? Source D: Source D shows that the ordinary people of Russia supported the Tsar wherever he went, although the public may have been doing this so the Tsar and his people will not give them a hard time, it was dangerous for the public to express their true feelings. The support shown was only a small percentage of the population, it was emotional support. The country saw the monarchy as a religion, so they have always been told to worship it. Source D is a reliable source because firstly the writer is the Tsar’s sister, she was an eyewitness. Secondly, she was writing in her private diary, there would be no reason for her to lie or exaggerate anything. Also, she would have written about these events a night (after they had happened) and so she may have only been picking out the good bits and forgetting the bad bits. Source E: Source E is useful in showing support for the Russian monarchy. It shows that faith in the government is decreasing and that a revolution is becoming more likely. The writer of this source, Alexander Guchkov was the leader of the Octobrists, a party basically loyal to the Tsar and his government. If the leader of a loyal party to the Tsar and his government saw and said that faith in the government was decreasing and revolution was very likely, then it would have been true. Source E’s writer, Alexander Guchkov is a more objective person than the writer of source D, the Tsar’s sister who was sheltered in Russian courts and biased in the Tsar’s favor. d) Study all the sources. ‘There was widespread support in Russia for the Tsar before 1914.’ Use the sources, and your own knowledge, to explain whether you agree with this view. Sources A and B show that there was an increase in strikes and strikes in factories during 1910 to 1914. However, it gives a limited answer to the statement above as it mainly looks at the industrial sector. Sources C and E show that even a reporter of the Okhrana and a leader of the Octobrists (both loyal parties to the Tsar) think that the support for the Tsar is decreasing. This makes a revolution more and more likely. Sources D and F show that many people came out to see the Tsar, however, they may have done this out of curiosity as the Tsar would have been something to see, not because they supported the Tsar. They also may have come out to see the Tsar because they were scared that if they did not come out to see and appear to be supporting the Tsar, they might get into trouble with the government. Sometimes people feel loyalty to the institution, but the may not like how the government was running the country, a lot of people would have been in this possession during this time. I do not think there was widespread support in Russia for the Tsar before 1914. This is because as sources D and F shows that the ordinary people of Russia appeared supported the Tsar wherever he went, although I think that the public may have been doing this so the Tsar and his people will not give them a hard time, I believe that it was dangerous for the public to express their true feelings. Sources D and E also only a small percentage of the population of Russia, it cannot be mistaken for the majority of the Russian population. The Tsar also failed to face the peasants, poverty and workers. As the 3 categories were fitted by most of Russia’s population, the Tsar was not very popular. The Tsar mainly supported the rich landowning class that was a very small percentage of the Russian population who did not need the Tsar very much. The people who needed the Tsar were the poor peasants with large hungry families (most of the Russian population), however the Tsar did not help them. This made a lot of people not to want to support the Tsar as he did not help the people in need. The Tsar was a autocratic ruler, this meant that he had complete and absolute power of Russia. A lot of people would not have liked this so the would not have really supported the Tsar. How to cite The Russian Revolution, c. 1910 – 1924, Sources Question, Papers