Its interesting how the syllabus is planned.
Had a lecture by this philosopher today on abortion, cloning and stuff. Philosophical side of it. Like when we should treat embryos as human beings, potentiality and stuff.
Ended up in a Socratic dialogue - basically he tried to question our (students') beliefs by twisting and turning them around.
Innovative use of Kant and some other philosophical techniques, you know the stretching of certain 'truths' such that they become absurd. For example, if we treat embryos as human beings since they do have the potential to be like you and me, we should all be busy procreating, every single moment of our lives, as otherwise our gametes will be attrited and innocent lives will be lost.
Maybe because I do have some rudimentary knowledge of philosophy, I knew what he was doing right after he deflected a question this naive member of the audience¹ posed.
Anyway, point is, his Socratic dialogue did, in a way, provoke some thought. There was this question he posed - since letting embryos die² was 'natural', so were diseases, why were we studying to become doctors then? Defying the natural order of things, were we not?³
Maybe its my aries character, supporting the underdog and all, but I like the sound of that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
¹ Who was angered, presumably, by his provocative statements.
² By not using them, from the previous question.
³ Paraphased - I like the sound of this more ;)