How Mill’s utilitarian
perspective might be applied
to the issue of embryo
research
When applying Mill’s theory you must always put
his concept of ‘higher pleasures’ at the heart of
your explanation.
His ideas about freedom and harm flow directly
from this.
From Mill’s perspective, embryo research will
normally be defended in order to bring benefits
to the lives of those already alive through IVF
technology or improvement in treatment of
diseases such as diabetes and cancer.
Free speech and freedom of action as
important conditions for the attainment of
higher pleasures
In On Liberty 1859 Mill argued that the higher
intellectual pleasures were only possible if
people were free to discuss, exchange and
debate ideas and to try them out.
Mill would have approved of a good debate
about the merits of embryo research and would
have encouraged experimentation that did not
harm others.
Mill saw society as progressive and believed
that the freedom of speech and action was
necessary for this (particularly for legislators).
He believed that it improved the distinctive
human faculties of discrimination and
judgement.
By exercising the human faculties, learning from
the results and observing the actions of others
and acting on the results, individuals develop
and contribute to the progress of society. So
freedom to conduct research is important
because in itself it contributes to the greater
good.
The link between freedom, progress and
higher pleasures
Freedom of action contributes to the general
progress of humanity
This progress is good in itself because of;
‘the permanent interests of man as
a progressive being’.
The higher pleasures are made possible by this
progress.
Free speech
Mill argued that free speech was
particularly important for progress and
would therefore have encouraged as full a
discussion of the ethics of embryology as
possible before research began.
The debate itself would have counted as a
‘higher pleasure’ and it would have helped
to clarify any important moral issues for
the following reasons:
Infallibility
People and groups may believe their views on
such things as the ‘Sanctity of Life’ to be
absolutely right, but it is dangerous to assume
this because many such assumptions have been
proved wrong in the past.
Mill argued that religious views about the
‘sanctity of life’ should be scrutinised for the
same reason.
Dead Dogma
Mill argues that opinions accepted only
because of endorsement by authority are no
more than prejudices.
Arguments are not valid unless supported by
reason.
If all views are subjected to scrutiny without
prejudice then they will need to find
arguments in their defence.
The strongest arguments will be rehearsed,
developed and become stronger.
Partly True
Mill argues that common opinions are rarely
wholly true and that many, which are largely
false contain some truth. Only by hearing these
arguments and refuting them may the true part
of them be understood.
The Partly True argument is one of Mill’s
strongest. By discussing opinions and
considering their merits, one approaches the
truth. Equally, by discussing largely false
opinions, one becomes aware of the part that is
true.
We can see that from Mill’s utilitarian
perspective a debate about the ethics of
embryology would have eliminated dead
dogma and prejudice from the argument
and clarified the good points about the
arguments for and against. This in itself
would have been good as it would have been
a ‘higher pleasure’.
Further it would have clarified any issues
of ‘harm’ caused by embryology. If the
research was considered harmful it would
not be allowed.
From Mill’s perspective there would have been
no ethical issue about the rights or interests of
embryos because they are not capable of being
harmed in a relevant sense. They cannot feel
pleasure or pain and their fate would not affect
the happiness of others.
He would have been concerned about the
medical benefits of the research to the extent
that it would have affected higher and lower
pleasures.
Why Mill might have been concerned:
Embryo research might be used for practices
harmful to humanity such as cloning and
‘designer babies’.
It is difficult to predict how useful research
would be, but this would be dealt with in the
freedom and progress dimensions of his
theory.