Concepts of Predictive and Trace Evidence and the Nature of Human Rights
500 to 800 word responses to those two selected questions
1. Hawthorne, Isaacs and Sridharan (2021) consider the following case: “The Blue Waste Company dumps blue molecules into the river of a town. There are also naturally occurring red molecules in the river. Both blue molecules and red molecules are known to cause mesothelioma, though the process of inducing mesothelioma takes many years and there is no method for directly determining the etiology in a particular case. The blue molecules outnumber the red molecules by a ratio of 7 to 3. It is incredibly unlikely that any case of mesothelioma is caused by the joint action of both red and blue molecules. A person from the town gets mesothelioma by drinking from the river. They sue the Blue Waste Company for damages.” (p.139) How is this case different from the Blue Bus case (presented on pp.131-132)? What do Hawthorne, Isaacs and Sridharan argue this case demonstrates? Be sure to explain the concepts of predictive and trace evidence and how they apply in this and the original blue bus case.
2. Consider the following two articles from the UN Declaration of Human Rights:
Article 4:
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 24:
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. Present a few different theories of the nature of human rights. Explain what the proponent of those theories might say about whether the rights enshrined in articles 4 and 24 count as genuine human rights.
Philosophy Question
Student’s Name
University
Course Number and Title
Instructor’s Name
Date
Philosophy Question
How Blue Waste Company Different from The Blue Bus Case
Comparing the Blue Bus case to the Blue Waste Company case reveals differences. First and foremost, as no known negative effects were associated with using the blue dye, it is still unclear whether it contributed to the Blue Bus case. It is understood that both blue and red molecules can be damaging in the Blue Waste Company case context. However, it is uncertain which of the two caused the harm in this particular case.
Secondly, In the Blue Bus case, the blue dye was present in a small quantity (less than 1%), making it unlikely that it caused any harm. Yet, in the instance of the Blue Waste Company, there are seven times as many blue molecules as red molecules, suggesting that the blue chemicals are more certain to have been harmful.
Thirdly, considering blame for the injury brought on by the blue dye in the Blue Bus case, it is apparent who is to blame. On the other hand, in the Blue Waste Company case, it is anticipated that the defendant would be held liable for the damage that resulted from the blue molecules they unleashed further into the river.
Lastly, regarding harm, the darkening of clothes and skin due to the blue dye in the Blue Bus case was quite minor. Yet, the injury mesothelioma inflicts in the Blue Waste Company instance is significantly more serious and may prove fatal.
What Hawthorne, Isaacs, and Sridharan Argue
In proving causation, this case emphasizes the importance of predictive evidence and the limitations of trace evidence, according to Hawthorne, Isaacs, and Sridharan (2021). While physical evidence that can be linked to a specific source or individual is known as trace evidence, predictive evidence is concerned with data that lets us determine the possibility that an incident will take place.
Predictive research suggests that blue molecules are more likely to induce mesothelioma than found in nature red molecules to the Blue Waste Company's discharge of blue molecules into the river because the proportion of blue to red molecules is seven to three. However, reliance on trace evidence to prove correlation is ineffective because it is impossible to confidently determine whether the blue or red chemicals brought on a given case's mesothelioma. (Hawthorne et al.,2021)
This idea of predictive evidence was also pertinent in the instance of the first blue bus, where its predictive evidence indicated that the blue dye used in the bus seats would probably irritate people's skin, even though trace evidence did not conclusively demonstrate causality. According to Hawthorne, Isaacs, and Sridharan (2021), predictive and trace evidence is crucial for proving causality. When determining causation in circumstances involving sophisticated scientific data, it is crucial to consider both forms of proof.
Different Theories of the Nature of Human Rights
The status of the rights contained in Articles 4 and 24 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights may be seen in conjunction with various human rights frameworks. First and foremost, the natural law theory contends that a fundamental natural law or moral framework serves as the foundation for human rights. Being human, all people have certain inalienable human rights that no governing board or institution can take away. This idea contends that civilization does...