Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

TOK presentation

No description

David Fuhrmann

on 14 January 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of TOK presentation

Should every country have the right to develop it?
Nuclear Technology
This aspect of the treaty prohibits anyone from producing nuclear weapons from nuclear material, and that it should only be used for peaceful purposes.
Nuclear Proliferation
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
What is it?
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament. It came into effect in 1970.
So, nuclear weapons are effectively banned for the whole world, except for the 5 countries that are certified 'Nuclear Weapons States'. These are USA, UK, Russia, China and France.
Peaceful use of nuclear energy
This is an example of special pleading
Besides the Nuclear Weapons states, India and Pakistan openly possess nuclear weapons. Also, Israel, North Korea and Iran are believed to have nuclear weapons or are in the process of making them.
From a utilitarian point of view the most satisfaction would be gained when there would be no nuclear weapons.
people would feel safer and wouldn’t have to worry about the threat of nuclear war. We have seen the effects of nuclear weapons e.g. Hiroshima and Nagasaki WWII. On an emotional side, many of the people who were affected by the catastrophes of such weapons by either losing family and loved ones will likely have much resentment.
On the categorical side, Pakistan has gone against the regulations set out, which it had also agreed to. Also, nuclear weapons are dangerous and would be seen by others as an act of aggression, potentially putting them in danger. Therefore making it categorically immoral, this is because it goes against 2 of the 3 maxims which are universality, and no manipulation
From the point of view of a country like Pakistan which has gained nuclear weapons after it was banned to do so, the country and its people may gain utility out from this action. This is could be due to Pakistanis now knowing that they can protect themselves if attacked. However it will probably create more fear elsewhere than utility. Therefore it isn't utilitarian.
"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament"
Nuclear Power is the only alternative to renewable energy sources in replacing fossil fuels as our main power source. It is much more efficient than renewable energy sources and can be used to produce energy at a much larger scale, therefore it can be argued that it’s our only choice for power production in the future. It doesn’t produce greenhouse gases, the main cause of global warming and as the amount of Uranium as a resource is vast and the amount needed to produce energy is low it is also is sometimes considered as a renewable resource
However, nuclear waste is radioactive and thus very toxic if nothing is done about it, it could potentially have devastating consequences. Also, countries that have nuclear reactors also have the capability to create nuclear weapons from these reactors, or anyone else who gains access to the reactor, for that matter.
Pro's of nuclear energy
and the con's
Countries should produce nuclear power as it will allow their peoples’ lives to function normally as they’ll still have enough power for all their needs even when fossil fuels run out. This comes with the added bonus of not producing greenhouse gases, benefiting the environment as well.
Nuclear power still produces nuclear waste, something that is still harmful to the environment. This waste could also be potentially used to create nuclear weapons which could lead to nuclear war.
Categorical reasoning: Nuclear power generates electricity, therefore it’s a good thing
Categorical imperative
Categorical imperative
Some countries have access to nuclear power for themselves, but don’t allow for others to develop the same capabilities – this is hypocritical of them, but it also means that nuclear power shouldn’t be allowed for anyone, since they’re not ok with everyone having it(Maxim of Universality)
Government has a duty to provide its citizens with basic things such as electricity, therefore it should use nuclear power. It also has the duty to take care of the environment.

Government has to ensure safety of citizens and act responsibly to avoid wars etc. Developing nuclear power creates the possibility of criminals trying to stealing nuclear materials in hopes of creating nuclear weapons, which could lead to war.
Who do you think should possess nuclear weapons?
None of the countries, which possessed nuclear weapons when the treaty came into effect, have gotten rid of them
Deontology and Categorical imperative
Countries are responsible for protecting their people
Everyone is allowed to have nuclear weapons
However, they aren't following the rules of the treaty. Also, they could potentially put the rest of the world in danger and it is a sign of aggression.Which yet again goes against the maxim of universality as they do not wish people to threaten them.
Which countries do you think should have access to nuclear energy?
The science of atomic radiation, atomic change and nuclear fission was developed from 1895 to 1945, much of it in the last six of those years. Over 1939-45, most development was focused on the atomic bomb. From 1945 attention was given to harnessing this energy in a controlled fashion for making electricity. Since 1956 the prime focus has been on the technological evolution of reliable nuclear power plants.
Intro to nuclear materials
What do you think about Nuclear Power in General?
Should countries have the right to produce Nuclear Power
And what about Nuclear Weapons?











Nuclear Safety Issues
Real Life Example's
Chernobyl, Ukrain (1986)
Fukushima, Japan (2011)
The Chernobyl nuclear accident occurred on Saturday, April 26, 1986.During the test of reactor 4, power surged unexpectedly, causing an explosion . Parts of Chernobyl today are still considered too radioactive for people but no one lives there anymore. The explosion caused death of a 400 000 pine trees, in a forest, This is now called the "Red Forest". It also resulted in contamination of ground water and the mutation of many species of plants and animals
Following a major earthquake, a 15-metre tsunami disabled the power supply and cooling of three Fukushima Daiichi reactors, causing a nuclear accident on 11 March 2011. All three cores largely melted in the first three days.There have been no deaths or cases of radiation sickness from the nuclear accident, but over 100,000 people had to be evacuated from their homes to ensure this.The area around Fukushima is still considered contaminated.
If these kind of things happen do you still think that we should use nuclear power ?
Full transcript