Throughout this project, I believe I have grown greatly as a thinker, particularly in my ability to delve more deeply into the complexities of a controversial issue like genetically modified foods and understand that there are nuances to every complex issue that aren’t necessarily black or white.
While my first post about the Monsanto Protection Act took a very definitive stance on the legislation, I feel that the majority of my blog posts towards the end of the project took a much more balanced approach, considering all the nuances of the particular issue. Even if I took a stance, I began to understand more deeply, through both my research and the responses of my peers, that the issue was much more complex than I had originally realized. The analysis posting especially helped me to understand viewpoints that might not have necessarily agreed with mine. Even if I didn’t agree, I was able to further understand why those viewpoints were valid.
Furthermore, as I began to understand the complexities of the issue, my research broadened. I learned that, while the issue of Monsanto, its products, and the company’s interaction with politics seemed like a narrow and defined choice, it was actually a hugely complex issue that often acted as merely a case study for a greater issue at hand – the interaction of corporations and politics and general, and the question of to what extent that interaction should exist. By merely researching my issue, I learned that it was frequently tied into much larger, more complex social sciences questions.