Question B

In terms of attempting to solve world hunger and food shortages, genetic altering food is a good thing. By developing strains of vegetables that are able to withstand the elements better and resist certain bacterium, a stable flow of food can be better established. Whether or not this is a good thing to put in our bodies is simply a personal choice. While genetically altered foods could nourish impoverished parts of the world, I can also understand where opponents to genetically altered food come from. Pollan stated that, "it allows a larger portion of human culture and intelligence to be incorporated into the plants themselves" (Pollan 198). Adding human influence into certain parts of nature is defeating the essential purpose of having nature in the first place. The beauty and simplicity of nature providing us with nourishment is quickly dirtied by our technology that we think is going to improve everything we touch. Again, this is also a matter of opinion, whether or not human influence should exist in all parts of nature, like plant life. I believe that using genetically altered food should only take place in last resort situations, like in extremely famished parts of our society. I think that it's important to remain reliant on the plain ways of nature, in order to maintain the closest connection with it. When we influence nature with human intelligence, we are taking away the uniqueness of nature bit by bit, and before we know it, it will be gone. It's a difficult question to debate, and I don't think that a concise answer as to whether or not genetically altered foods is a good thing exists. It's merely a matter of opinion and perspective.