One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of andquot;dopingandquot; scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new andquot;FastSkinandquot; swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the andquot;Special Olympicsandquot; for athletes with disabilities: a andquot;Super Olympicsandquot;, featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of andquot;cheatingandquot;, in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Class 12 Exam > Class 12 Questions > One of the kinds of human enhancement that ha...

Join the Discussion on the App

One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.

At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.

The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes' equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.

Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.

For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.

Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries' inability to complete in ski competitions?

a)
A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.
b)
A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.
c)
In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.
d)
A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Languages: Mock Test - 6

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive phil...

The example of equatorial countries is used to illustrate the concept of - "unfortunate but not unfair". Equatorial countries do not have snow. So, they are not able to compete effectively with northern countries in skiing competitions. Author says this not a 'fairness' issue. Neither can we stop skiing competition because of equatorial countries not having a level-playing ground nor can we give snow to equatorial countries! So, it is unfortunate not unfair.

We are looking an example like that - unfortunate but not unfair.

Answer choice (c) is an accurate analogy. Some candidates may have lot of money to spend in elections. That is allowed and there is nothing wrong with that. So, if some other candidates do not have resources, then it is unfortunate not unfair.

Incorrect Answers

(a) - This is out and out cheating. It is definitely unfair.

(b) - This is also unfair. It is clearly mentioned - the shopkeeper uses UNFAIR practices

(d) - This is unfair. Billing a patient just to make more money is unfair.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam

Similar Class 12 Doubts

One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. "Super Olympics", as per the passage

View answer

One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. What does the meaning of the word "exacerbate" as used in the passage mean?

View answer

One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. According to the passage, one of the reasons as to why athletic performance enhancements get so much attention is.

View answer

One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. In the last paragraph, what is the authors appeal to the critics of biomedical enhancements?

View answer

In the wake of the varying forms which the idea of the end of history has taken, the intellectual history of disillusionment and resignation has been countered with a Leftist framework. But, with almost 10 million nonwhite people in the EU, the rising number of impoverished masses in Brazil, or in South Asia, as well as the problems of health and illiteracy, the Left has a formidable task before it; issues concerning economic deprivation, the brutalisation of workers, increasing spending on nuclear enhancement and the need for all ethnic minorities to explicitly feature in a pluralistic vision needs to be the foundation of any reinvention of the Left.The long drawn out economic and political tensions, for instance, in Latin America have moved the Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and Evo Morales trio towards an international agenda for social reconstruction within which socialism does not need to be replaced but must be put forward as a programme to salvage a world from inequality and the abuse of power, especially the hegemony of the White House. They have together constructed a progressive alliance, insisting on a collective leadership that endorses the rich diversity of radical and socialist traditions.In a drastically damaged world in which received political ideologies have been exhausted, anti-imperialist agenda and far-reaching remedies have been initiated in Bolivia, Cuba and Venezuela to check the erratic play of market forces. Chavez has been particularly hard hitting through his move of cutting off oil supplies to the US and his unquestionable allegiance with Castro. He has not hesitated to build trade relations with China and to back Irans nuclear ambitions. The dream of an anti-imperialist union has finally come true by the induction of Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina, Uruguay, Peru and Chile into the club headed by Castro and Chavez, and underpinned by the age-old vision for a strong Leftist opposition to the interventionist policies of the U.S. Inspired by great heroes like Simon Bolivar and Che Guevara, Chavez has been fighting for regional integration and a society that bases itself on the ideology of the new South American Left.Q. What issues, according to the passage, should form the basis for the Left to rise and be counted?

View answer

One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for Class 12 2024 is part of Class 12 preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the Class 12 exam syllabus. Information about One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for Class 12 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for Class 12. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Class 12 Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice One of the kinds of human enhancement that has received extensive philosophical attention in recent years is the use of biomedical interventions to improve the physical performance of athletes in the context of sports.One reason athletic performance enhancement garners so much attention is because of its currency, given the epidemic of "doping" scandals in contemporary sport.At first impression, the ethical problem with performance enhancement in sport would seem to be simply a problem of cheating. If the rules of sport forbid the use of performance enhancements, then their illicit use confers an advantage to users against other athletes. That advantage, in turn, can create pressure for more athletes to cheat in the same way, undermining the basis for the competitions at stake and exacerbating the gap between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.The rules of a game can be changed. In sports, novel forms of performance enhancing equipment and training are routinely introduced as athletic technology and expertise evolve. Where issues of athletes equitable access arise, they can be dealt with in one of two ways.Sometimes it is possible to ensure fair distribution, as for example, when the International Olympic Committee negotiated an agreement with the manufacturer of the new "FastSkin" swimming suit to provide suits to all the teams at the Sydney Olympics. In other cases, inequalities may simply come to be accepted as unfortunate but not unfair. This is, for example, how many people would view a story about an equatorial country that could not afford year-round artificial snow for its ski team, and so could not compete evenly with the ski teams of northern countries. If enhancement interventions can either be distributed fairly or the inequities they create can be written into the rules of the social game in question as part of the given advantages of the more fortunate, then individual users no longer face a fairness problem.For those who can afford it, for example, what would be ethically suspect about mounting a mirror image of the "Special Olympics" for athletes with disabilities: a "Super Olympics", featuring athletes universally equipped with the latest modifications and enhancements? For answers to that challenge, the critics of biomedical enhancement have to dig beyond concerns about the fair governance of games to a deeper and broader sense of "cheating", in terms of the corrosive effects of enhancement on the integrity of admirable human practices.Q. Which of the following is analogous to the example of equatorial countries inability to complete in ski competitions?a)A student gets the question paper one day before an examination.b)A shopkeeper uses unfair trade practices to ensure that all the other competing shops in his locality is shut down.c)In an election, an independent candidate with few resources is having to fight against a candidate with huge resources at his disposal.d)A hospital used magnetic resonance imaging and billed the patient Rs. 90,000 when in fact it was not needed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice Class 12 tests.

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam