This paper explores three major ethical frameworks—utilitarianism, Kant's Categorical Imperative, and virtue ethics—and applies them to the controversial issue of stem cell research. The author argues that stem cell research is ethically problematic because it violates the principle of respect for all persons by destroying potential human life, and because its purported benefits do not justify the significant social and moral harms it creates. The analysis demonstrates how different ethical theories can be used to evaluate contemporary moral questions and support consistent ethical decision-making.
In philosophy, ethics is described as the systematic analysis of how people should behave toward themselves and others. It is also explained as the study of what character traits, things, or types of people are good, admirable, and estimable, as well as those that are bad, worthy of condemnation, and culpable. While this field deals with general principles or rules, it also engages with specific cases. Some of the most common ethical perspectives used when analyzing the morality of various controversial topics include Act and Rule Utilitarianism, virtue ethics, and Kant's Categorical Imperative.
The three major concerns in ethics are the certainty of correct moral beliefs, the process of deciding moral questions, and how to live a good life. These concerns form the basis of several approaches or perspectives on ethics that have been developed by various ethical theorists. According to Kant, the actual ethical concern is not the process of deciding what is right, but rather the constant struggle to apply what is right regardless of temptations and distractions.
The theory of ethical relativism states that whether an act is right or wrong depends on the particular society in which an individual lives. In opposition to this theory, Kant argues that ethical principles are experienced as Categorical Imperatives—commands that order people to do something unconditionally despite their aims, purposes, and desires. Another approach is the Utilitarianism theory, which states that all people should always attempt to create the greatest happiness for the largest number of people. Also known as the Greatest Happiness Theory, the main doctrine behind Utilitarianism identifies pleasure with good and pain with evil.
This doctrine is subdivided into Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Act Utilitarianism emphasizes that people should use the utility principle in deciding their actions regardless of their position in society. In contrast, Rule Utilitarianism states that governments should use the utility principle in enacting general laws while treating everyone fairly. The virtue ethics principle focuses on character—the kind of person an individual is—rather than behavior, or the actions of a person (Wolff, 2012).
One of the most controversial and contentious issues in today's society is the morality of stem cell research, because it involves the destruction of a fetus or embryo. Stem cell research has generated enormous debate because some people consider it the destruction of a potential human being. Conversely, others view it as a significant discovery that could help treat devastating diseases and illnesses without current cures. The underlying disagreement between these positions concerns when life actually begins. Through the application of several ethical theories, stem cell research is unethical for the following reasons.
Based on the utilitarian ethical theory, stem cell research is unethical because it violates the principle of respecting all individuals and providing the greatest happiness to many people. The emergence of a fetus means that it should be considered a fully-fledged person who deserves to be treated with respect and dignity. Through this respect and dignity, we guarantee and provide the greatest happiness to the fetus or fully developed person who deserves access to the right to life.
Therefore, by destroying the fetus, stem cell research does not promote the principle of providing the greatest happiness to many people. This practice is unethical because it does not increase the amount of pleasure that the fetus experiences; rather, it increases the amount of pain. It is also unethical because it results in unfair treatment of individuals, unlike the fair treatment stated in the Utilitarian ethical principle.
Before any research is conducted, there is a significant need to examine the potential net social benefit of that research. This need goes beyond doing no harm to achieving some good, as envisioned in Kant's Categorical Imperative. Stem cell research is unethical based on Kant's approach, which requires that selfish interests be disregarded in favor of rules that are equally reasonable to all moral agents. The research is unethical because the potential benefits of the practice are not only overstated but also less than the actual and potential social harms.
As a result of these numerous disadvantages and social harms, stem cell research is a practice not based on rules that are equally reasonable for all moral agents to embrace. Moreover, since the practice is not generally reasonable and acceptable among all members of society, it is unethical. This is largely because if the research is undertaken, important objections raised by various groups—including religious organizations and pro-life activists—would be neglected, promoting disrespect for cultural and religious beliefs.
As the world continues to experience dramatic advances across various fields, ethical dimensions continue to emerge. The emerging dimensions, concerns, and questions can be addressed through ethical approaches and principles. While ethical theories do not provide ready-made solutions, they help guide decision-making processes.
Wolff, R. P. (2012). Ethical theory. In About philosophy. Pearson Education, Inc.
You’re 97% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.