“Flowers for Algernon” Argumentative Essay In the story “Flowers for Algernon”, written by Daniel Keyes, a mentally challenged, thirty-seven year old man named Charlie Gordon received a once in a lifetime opportunity- he may be able to triple his intelligence. The experiment- which was not tested on humans- was run by two doctors: Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss. The medical professionals were opportunists and would try anything for the experiment to work- even permanently subdue humans. Charlie dreamed that his chance to be an average, intelligent man would arrive. Charlie was blind to the hardships he would face.
Charlie did not even benefit that well from being a test subject in the experiment. Similarly, the treatment of Charlie was not very ethical because he was not treated specially for his mental state of disability. Lastly, this surgery did not provide enough benefits to even dent the weight of his unethical death. In the story Charlie was used because of his inferior intelligence and not treated well enough as he should have which led to his wrongful death. This story was fictional, but the use and abuse of human test subjects is
Charlie doesn’t want that to happen to him, but he knows it is inevitable. It is very hard to live with forgetfulness, impaired motor activity, depression, and a low IQ without any help. He has to go through the pain of knowing that the temporary intelligence he had received was all going to leave him. Charlie also does not have a stable income so it would be hard for him to learn more through an adult school like Miss Kinnian’s. By comparing Charlie’s mental state before and after the experiment, one can easily see that he was much more mentally stable before the
Anton Tompert Mrs. Veitch 3rd Period 2.15.18 Balance of Awareness Would it be worse to have an IQ of 204 or 68? Would it be worse to know everything but not be able to talk with anyone without frustration or know nothing but not be able to talk of anything more complex than third grade level? In the short science fiction story, “Flowers for Algernon” by Daniel Keyes, Charlie Gordon with an IQ of 68 and has a difficult time learning anything as simple as reading or writing is given the option to triple his intelligence with a suspicious surgery. Charlie, ignorant of the suspicion or risk that comes with this surgery is desperate to become intelligent as it is his only wish and nothing is more important to him. His teacher, Miss Kinnian recommend him for the surgery out of anyone in the class due to his egre and positive outlook on intelligence.
The doctors did not explain what they were doing to Charlie. The reader can tell this because in the story Charlie is often puzzled about the tests that the doctors are performing (Keyes). For example he does not understand the Rorschach test at all. He thinks that there are hidden pictures in the ink while what they actually are looking for him to do is imagine a picture from the ink
Flowers Essay “How strange it is that people of honest feelings and sensibilty, who would not take advantage of a man born without arms or legs or eyes—how such people think nothing of abusing a man with low intelligence.” - Daniel Keyes. In the short story “Flowers for Algernon” by Daniel Keyes, Charlie Gordon, a man with low intelligence, wants to be smarter, and live life like everyone else. He gets the chance to join an experiment, which makes him a genius, but sadly later the effect has subsided and his intelligence was low again. Although Charlie has a low IQ during the beginning and ending of the story, most of the time, his identity and character allows him to contribute to society during the course of the story. Before the surgery, Charlie Gordon’s identity and character can best be described as a hard worker and student who enjoys his work,his
But one cannot always escape from the unknown, i.e., what he cannot manage: "Modern western medicine is ‘scientific’, in the sense that it presumes to control and dominate things. But death is unavoidable. "27 Thus withholding or withdrawing life supportive care on the basis of fear of a future handicap is also ominous for caregivers. It is a negation of the desire and wonder of existence, however imperfect; it means negation of the wonder and desire of our own existence, however flawed: "The caregiver’s dialectic is identical to the patient’s dialectic. To what extent is the caregiver able to accept a person who is suffering, especially where he is suffering?
Shelley indicates that his teachers also deserve a cut of the blame, as they quickly disregard the principle that highlights responsible mentoring. They were meant to help “educate, mentor, and advise students” (Resnik) such as Victor, but clearly failed to do so. They dismiss his interest in alchemy without explaining why such a study is dangerous or harmful, not only to individuals, but to the whole of the community. At the school, M. Krempe dismisses alchemists as “nonsense” while M. Waldman tells Victor that these studies “promised impossibilities and preformed nothing” (Shelley). Never once did they discuss the dangers, they just spoke of their dislike for the field, and how they found it to be worthless and unhelpful in relation to their studies.
Doctors around him raised suspicion about his communication skills and fitness to practice in relation to patient safety. Along with his lack of communication he also was seen “speaking to a patient inappropriately while trying to obtain their consent to a repeated attempt at a cannulation (intravenous line) procedure when working as a surgical SHO”(8), this particular incident relates to the question excellently, this behaviour is completely inappropriate, furthermore the doctor in question was a Senior House Officer (SHO); a trusted, senior doctor who is looked to for a good
The validity and even humanity in animal testing is something on the margins of morale, it is not something done out of joy, it is not pleasurable for the testers or the tested themselves. So there, we are given a reason to submit the simple question of whether animal testing should be permitted at all. Why not simply cut our losses and move on to greener pastures, after all it is indeed the definition of grotesque to experiment on living beings and people may have been right to protest and raise awareness for such cruel misconducts. There must be something that can be done. However, that line of thinking quickly clashes with the fact that with the help of exactly such testing, with the sacrifice of those animal lives, human lives are saved in return.
In summary, Charlie Gordon 's doctors were not ethical because they did not follow the Hippocratic Oath or ask themselves the necessary ethical questions doctors must ask themselves. They acted foolishly and because of that, they hurt Charlie in the long run. Possibly, if Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss gave him all the information, Charlie wouldn 't have agreed to the operation and wouldn’t have had to go through the pain of losing everything. He couldn 't make a good choice based on the information
He takes the A.I surgery to become smart and it tripled is I.Q from 68 to 204. Charlie Gordon should have the A.I surgery. Charlie felt new emotions, he was a problem solver and he contributed to science. Also, Charlie felt new emotions. Another piece of evidence has been he never felt these emotions before A.I.
Among multiple issues including giving misleading information, the most dominate is the lack of consent Milgram received from his subjects to participate in such a test (102). While I do see that this is immoral, there is no way that Milgram could have completed his experiments effectively if he had done it morally. The first issue is if he explains what is actually going to happen during the experiments, that would obviously hurt the integrity of his results. Also, going back to how the experiments help us, if those who participated knew what was going to happen, it wouldn’t have affected them as severely. It was the shock that the experiment gave that brought their life choices into question.
this Court’s order to respond in full to the Hospital’s discovery requests and produce the requested documents. Additionally, Defendant failed to respond to the Hospital’s attempts to confer on this Motion. III. Conclusion and Prayer Defendant’s bad faith behavior implies that he considers himself to be above the requirements of the Rules of Civil Procedure and the authority of this Court. The complete lack of respect for the Hospital, the Hospital’s counsel, this Court, and the Rules of Civil Procedure shown by blatantly ignoring valid discovery requests for more than six months and this Court’s Order for more than two months indicate a willful disregard that require sanctions.