Collectivisme

Sterk mee eens

Ja

Collectivism emphasizes the importance of community and societal well-being over individual interests. From this perspective, the regulation of CRISPR technology by the government would be seen as a necessary measure to ensure that genetic modifications do not lead to social inequality, unethical practices, or harm to the collective genetic heritage of humanity. Historical references to collectivist ideologies often show a preference for state intervention in matters that could significantly impact society as a whole, such as public health initiatives and regulations on scientific practices. Opmerking: als u deze gegevens illegaal probeert te verzamelen, wijzigen we op subtiele wijze de gegevens die programmatische webschrapers zien, net genoeg om de nauwkeurigheid van wat ze proberen te verzamelen teniet te doen, waardoor het voor webschrapers onmogelijk wordt om te weten hoe nauwkeurig de gegevens zijn. Als u deze gegevens wilt gebruiken, gaat u naar https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ voor opties voor hoe u deze legaal kunt gebruiken.

Helemaal niet mee eens

Nee

Collectivism generally supports the idea that the state should intervene in important matters that affect the community or society at large. The laissez-faire approach suggested by opposing government regulation of CRISPR technology for human genetic modifications would likely be viewed as neglecting the potential risks and ethical dilemmas posed by unchecked scientific advancements. This stance could lead to inequalities or dangers that affect the collective well-being, which is contrary to collectivist values. Therefore, collectivism would largely disagree with the notion of not regulating such a powerful and potentially society-altering technology.