Synthesis matrix

Synthesis Matrix The sources for your literature review do not need to and should not all agree; you must capture a debate in your literature. If all your sources agree, you either are missing part of the debate or the debate doesn’t exist. Remember that your sources must be analytical and argumentative in nature, and that academic sources found through the research databases are the best way to accomplish this. You may not use sources for the literature review that are simply reportage; each of your sources must make its own argument. You must fill out at least two source boxes for each topic, and you may fill out all four if all of your sources address the topic. Each row (the horizontal axis) will form one paragraph in your literature review. This matrix will serve as an outline for a first draft of your review. Source A

Author: Appel Title: “Is All Fair in Biological Warfare? The Controversy Over Genetically Engineered Biological Weapons”

Source B Author: Fee and Brown Title: “Preemptive Biopreparedness: Can We Learn Anything from History?”

Source C Author: Ouagrham- Gormley Title: "Barriers to Bioweapons: Intangible Obstacles to Proliferation."

Source D Author: Zanders Title: “Introduction: Special issue on Ethics and reason in chemical and biological weapons research.”

Topic 1: Bioweapon research enabling crime

Page number(s): Page number(s): Page number(s): 83 Ouagrham-Gormley challenges the widely held notion that terrorist organizations are able to replicate bioweapons. She cites Iraq under Saddam Hussein and the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo.

Page number(s): 4 Zanders employs the same example of Aum Shinrikyo to illustrate the point that terrorist organizations are actually attempting to replicate biological weapons, which is concerning enough even if they don’t succeed.

Topic 2: Negative economic effects of devoting funds to bioweapon research

Page number(s): Page number(s): 725, 721 Bioweapons research in the US during the cold war led to a decrease in funding for local health departments

Page number(s): Page number(s): 5 Zanders points out that bioweapons “tie up police and health facilities” (5).

Topic 3: Ethnic bioweapons

Page number(s): 431 Ethnic bioweapons are able to target specific races, and this “crosses an additional moral trench” (431)

Page number(s): Page number(s): 81 Ouagrham-Gormley notes that a report found “a bioweapons attack was more likely than a nuclear event given the availability of material, equipment, and know- how required to produce bioweapons” (81).

Page number(s):

Topic 4: Research begets further bioweapons

Page number(s): Page number(s): 721 There has been an increase in the amount of money being allocated to bioweapons research, and this funding creates more and more bioweapons for terrorists to steal and use for their own purposes

Page number(s): 83 Ouagrham-Gormley disagrees that terrorists can easily get ahold of bioweapons research, but she offers the example of Bruce Ivins, who worked in bioterrorism research and spread the anthrax virus through an act of terrorism.

Page number(s):

Topic 5: Whether this research should continue

Page number(s): 430 Appel argues that bioweapons research in in past could be seen as not necessarily bad, but now that we are developing bioweapons that target specific ethnicities, the research itself may be problematic.

Page number(s): Page number(s):

Page number(s): 10, 6 Some scientists argue that bioweapons research itself can’t be judged as ethically problematic on its own, but instead it must be judged by its results.