The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks puts forward the question of whether it is right to do something that negatively impacts an individual in order to benefit society as a whole. Is such an action ever justified? Does your personal involvement (i.e. you are the one being negatively impacted or are the one receiving the positive benefits) change the way you would feel about such a circumstance?

It is justifiable to do something that affects an individual, one person negatively so as to benefit the society (many people) as a whole. This can be simply put as save one to save many. It can be justified in a situation where the number of Individuals who got saved were far more than those that got impacted negatively. When such things happen, it is for the greater good.

If I was the one that was impacted negatively, it still wouldn't change how I feel about circumstances of this sort.

divyamadaan8054 divyamadaan8054 · Answer 2 · 2022-02-04T09:27:17+01:00

Henrietta’s life had a very limited exposure to the various and diverse lifestyles of the world as her only exposure was limited to harvesting tobacco and butchering pigs.

The Immortal Life of Henrietta

It is justifiable to do something that affects an individual, one person negatively so as to benefit the society (many people) as a whole. This can be simply put as save one to save many.

It can be justified in a situation where the number of Individuals who got saved were far more than those that got impacted negatively. When such things happen, it is for the greater good.

Learn more about Henrietta, refer to the link:

https://brainly.com/question/2708363