 To
consider the relationship that science has
to ethics.
 To understand the need for human
experimentation
KEY WORDS
Relationship
Thalidomide
Right to information
KEY QUESTION
Should science be
subject to ethics or
should it be the
other way round?
1.
Key questions and quotes
2.
Medical experimentation has saved many lives.
3.
The drug Thalidomide caused new laws and
regulations regarding the testing of drugs use of
drugs.
4.
Experimentation is on animals or humans.
5.
Doctors have an ethical duty to ensure that when
experimentations are as safe as possible.
6.
They must publish any possible side-effects promptly
The government has a duty to ensure that this is
enforced.
Most people believe that science should be kept in
check by ethics.
7.
8.
1.
What should the relationship the
between ethics and science?
2.
Should one control the other, and if so
which should control which?
3.
What kinds of ethical rules should
science and technology follow and who
should keep check?
“Science
has taught us to put the
atom to work. But to make it
work for good instead of for evil
lies in the domain dealing with
the principles of human duty. We
are now facing a problem more
of ethics than physics.”
(Baruch 2000)
“Ethics
and science need
to shake hands”
Cabot 2000
“Science
should submit
to ethics, not ethics to
science”
(Gragam)
“Science,
by itself, cannot
supply us with an ethic. It
can show us how to
achieve a given end, and it
may show us that some
ends cannot be achieved.”
(Russell)
Science
cannot stop
while ethics catches
up...and nobody should
expect scientists to do
all the thinking for the
country.”
(Stackman)
 Science
needs ethics.
 Without it, science will be unchecked.
 Inventions and advancements despite being
many and with speed could lead us into a
world which we do not want to live in.
 A world like:



Walden Two
1984
Brave new world
one key area that
ethics needs to be
concerned with is
EXPERIMENTATION
 In
the last century there have been enormous
breakthroughs in medicine.
 The
discovery of penicillin (Alex Fleming)
and the mass production of the drug had a
major impact on reducing the number of
deaths during WW3 – perhaps as many of 15
per cent of all causalities among allied
forces.
 Some
terrible mistakes have been made
when drug treatments have gone badly
wrong such as THALIDOMIDE.
KEY TERMS
 Testing
was inadequate, resulting in
terrible effects on the children of
women who had taken the drug in their
pregnancies.
 Aprox
20,000 children were born with
severe malformities including
PHOCOMELIA.
 Because
of cases such as the
Thalidomide catastrophe, regulations
require new drugs to be tested on both
animals and consenting humans.
THALIDOMIDE: a
drug prescribed
from 1957 – 1961
in many
countries chiefly
to pregnant
women to
combat morning
sickness.
PHOCOMELIA: a
deformity
whereby the
individual has
very short or
absent limbs.
 There
is some risk, which is one reason
why testing on animals is carried out
before human trials can begin.
 Nevertheless,
there are recent examples
where things have gone wrong.
 On
march 13 2006, six healthy men were injected with an anti-inflammatory drug
being developed for the treatment of
rheumatoid arthritis and leukaemia.
 Almost
immediately their bodies swelled
up and their breathing became erratic.
 Their
organs began to fail leaving two of
them in a critical condition.
 The
drug was being developed by a
German firm TeGenero.
 The
men had been paid £2000 each for
taking part in the study
A
number of ethical issues are involved here.
1.
the duty of doctors, scientists and researchers
to act ethically in the production of new drugs,
both in their preparation and also in the testing
2.
the open and honest publication of results
 Doctors
take the Hippocratic oath, which
begins ‘first do no harm’.
 They
have a professional ethical duty to the
public, their patients, those involved in the
production of new medicines and the
profession.
 If
a doctor or drug company knows of sideeffects to their drugs these must be
published.
 Concealing
such information sacrifices the
interest of the patients or the public for
short-term sales goals, and it endangers
future medicine production by casting doubt
on the integrity of the industry.

These pharmaceutical companies fund the
development of new treatments which bring
benefit to many. In a recent case of
GlaxoSmithKline was warned by the UK drugs
regulator that they should have been quicker to
raise the alarm on the risk of suicidal behaviour
associated with the antidepressant Seroxat in
those under 18.

There was evidence that the drug was not as
effective with children and adolescents and
evidence that there was a higher risk of suicidal
behaviour for those in this age group.
 While
GlaxoSmithKline believed they had
published the information early enough the
regulator disagreed.
 It
is not known how many young people may
have committed suicide as a result of the
delay but the regulators felt many young
people were put at an unnecessary risk.
 GlaxoSmithKline
is thought to have know
about the risk in the late 1990’s, but data
showed that details of this risk were not
passed to the regulatory authority until may
2003
 The
state has a ethical obligation to have
a regulated environment requiring
safeguards to protect the public from
possible side-effects from new drugs
while at the same time allowing for the
development of new medicines which
have life-saving or life-enhancing
consequences.
1.
Consider the quotations at the beginning
of this lesson. Write a sentence
explaining what each one means.
2.
Are there any that you strongly agree or
disagree with?
3.
How might you respond to them?
1.
Key questions and quotes
2.
Medical experimentation has saved many lives.
3.
The drug Thalidomide caused new laws and
regulations regarding the testing of drugs use of
drugs.
4.
Experimentation is on animals or humans.
5.
Doctors have an ethical duty to ensure that when
experimentations are as safe as possible.
6.
They must publish any possible side-effects promptly
The government has a duty to ensure that this is
enforced.
Most people believe that science should be kept in
check by ethics.
7.
8.
 To
know and understand the importance of
human experimentation.
 To know and understand the arguments for
and against human experimentation.
KEY WORDS
KEY QUESTION
Licence
Should
experimentation
continue at any
cost?
Informed consent
Responsibility




Human experimentation is essential for the
security of drugs.
Testers are liable if they cause injury
There have been some extreme cases of human
rights violations when ethics has been sidelined
For
1.
2.
3.

More accurate results
Security of mind
Prevents disasters
Against
1.
2.
3.
Informed consent
Unequal society
Abuse and a Slippery slope
 Animal
testing form part of the process
involved in gaining a licence to sell a
medicine in developed countries.
 The
human testers have to give their
informed consent in order for such testing to
be ethical.
 Where
there have been experiments that
have gone wrong and caused problems for
participants the people in charge of the
study can be held liable.
 Soldiers
who, were exposed to levels of
radiation during nuclear testing in the South
Pacific Ocean, developed serious medical
conditions, including cancer.
 In
some cases governments have had to set
up compensation schemes for soldiers and
civilians affected by radiation.
 In
times of war, there are occasions where
life-saving new ideas have to be tried out
and there is no time for testing and slow
gradual development.
 That
is one reason why medical
breakthroughs often happen during times of
war.
 In
the past there have been instances where
people were unknowing guinea pigs.
 During
WW2 at the Queen Victoria Hospital
near East Grinstead, badly burnt pilots were
subject to experimental practices which led
to breakthroughs in the treatment of burns
and plastic surgery.
 The
pilots who were treated there were
known as the Guinea Pig Club and they still
meet there once a year.
 For
these pilots and their doctors the risks
were unknown, but the consequences of not
trying to develop new treatments were very
severe so it was worth taking the risk.
 The
idea of informed consent seems crucial.
 Being
forced to undergo risky unproven
techniques or procedures seems to go against
the idea of individual liberty and freedom.
 It
goes against the idea that human beings
have a dignity or worth which cannot be
removed or ignored.
 It
is clear that when informed consent has
been neglected it has resulted in some of the
worst atrocities known to man.
10.
THE
STANFORD
EXPERIMENT
9.
THE MONSTER STUDY
8.
PROJECT 4.1
7.
PROJECT
MKULTRA
6.
THE AVERSION
PROJECT
4.
POISON
LAB OF
THE
SOVIETS
5.
NORTH
KOREAN
EXPERIMENTATION
1.
THE NAZI
EXPERIMENTS
3.
THE TUSKEGEE SYPHILIS
STUDY
2.
UNIT 731

The idea of the dignity of the human person
is found in religious traditions where human
beings are said to be sacred.

In philosophical traditions such as Kantian
Ethics which gives human beings value above
all other creatures – a value which has no
price, even for the greater good, in
utilitarian terms.

The NEW ETHIC of the 21st Century (Human
Rights) champions the importance and value
of the individual.

The ideas that procedures should be tested
before becoming widely available is vital.

So the solution is to invite testers to give
informed consent with the promise of further
treatment and support if the test goes wrong.

Medical procedures and treatments need to be
practised first, and established as safe by testing
on human beings.

This is part of the responsibility that doctors and
government regulatory authorities have to
individual patients and the general public
 If
there are doubts about the integrity or
safety of the medical system then there is
a real danger to public health.
 If
members of the public cannot trust the
treatments being suggested then they may
do themselves more harm by not being
treated or pursuing an unsafe treatment.
 But
ethics must be in control when we are
testing to prevent Human Rights violations
for
 Testing
needs to be completed on Humans
as it gives more accurate results than
testing on animals.
 It
is possible to get feedback from the
person being experimented on that again
increases the reliability of the results.
 Testing
on humans gives the general
population the added advantage of peace
of mind.
 People
feel safer knowing that products
have been tested on humans as well as
animals.
 They
are more likely to take the drug.
 Testing
on humans can prevent disasters
such as the issues with Thalidomide.
 As
well as saving people from deformities
it could also save lives in the long run
against
 Can
a person really given informed
consent to testing on a drug that we do
not know the side effects of?
 Consider
the case of the men above. It
seems that they clearly would not have
consented to the experiment.
 What
if it results in death? In British law
you cannot consent to your own death!
 Payment
for experimentation is essential
to get people involved.
 As a result it thrives in poverty stricken
areas and for people who are in desperate
situations.
 It seems unfair that in order to survive a
person should have to risk their life.
 This creates an unequal society where the
rich have a better quality of life.
 It
is clearly open to abuse in desperate
situations
 War
breeds a desperate need for
advancement
 It
is clear the governments have and
could again experiment on their people in
order to make advancements
 By
allowing it, you are allowing a
potential slippery slope.
1.
Should prisoners convicted of serious crimes
be required to undergo medical testing as
part of giving something back to society?
2.
What responsibilities do commercial
pharmaceutical companies have to the
wider community, doctors and patients?
3.
How could it be argued that human testing:
Undermines human dignity?
b) Maintains human dignity?
a)




Human experimentation is essential for the
security of drugs.
Testers are liable if they cause injury
There have been some extreme cases of human
rights violations when ethics has been sidelined
For
1.
2.
3.

More accurate results
Security of mind
Prevents disasters
Against
1.
2.
3.
Informed consent
Unequal society
Abuse and a Slippery slope
 To
know and understand the law regarding
animal testing
 To know and understand the arguments for
and against animal testing
KEY WORDS
Specieism
Vivisection
Animal rights
KEY PHILOSOPHERS
Singer
Cohan
Fox
Regan
Degrazia
1.
Statistics about animal experimentation
2.
The use and history of animal experimentation
3.
Arguments for:
Helps research
 Animals do not matter as much as people
 Ensures the safety of drugs
 Similar results to humans

Arguments against:
4.





Does not consider animal welfare
specieist
unreliable
Cost
Waste of life
BBC SCIENCE AND
NATURE WEBSITE
 The
BBC figures are disputed by
animal rights organisations who
suggest they do not reflect the whole
picture.
 In
the UK, new drugs must be tested
on two different species of live
mammal, one of which must be a
large non-rodent.
 However,
UK law now insists that no
animal experiments be conducted if
there is a realistic alternative.
•2.73 million
experiments in
the 12 months of
2002
•Total number of
procedures rose
by 4.2% on 2001
•About 80% are
for research and
drug development
•Safety testing
accounts for most
of the rest
 One
side-effect of having a strict medical
regime for the development of drugs is that
animals are used for testing.
 Human
life.
life is valued more highly than animal
 The
examples we have considered illustrate
the dangers if a drug is not tested properly.
(Thalidomide)
 New
treatments for new and existing
conditions and diseases rely on animal
testing.
 The
royal society has argued that virtually
every medical achievement in the 20th
century was possible because animals were
used in some way.
 For
many scientists, animal testing and
experimentation has been essential in the
eradication of disease and alleviation of
suffering which we all now depend upon, and
it will continue to be essential.
Animal welfare has been
important throughout
history
 The
laws requiring animal testing and
experimentation also require consideration
of the animals wellbeing.
 In
Britain an early anti-vivisection movement
helped to bring about the Cruelty to Animals
Act 1876. This provided some protection to
research animals, preventing some major
abuses and discouraging some experiments.
 In
1906 a Royal Commission led to the
appointment of full-time inspectors as well
as a rule requiring the painless killing of
animals who suffered severe, enduring pain.

Despite the improvements to animal
experimentation legislation there is still a
number of contentious issues over animal
experimentation.






They still experience pain
Animals are unable to give consent
they are not given the same moral consideration
They are not treated as moral persons
They have far fewer rights than human beings
This becomes particularly contentious when the
animals used in testing are primates such as
monkeys or apes.

The major pro for animal testing is that it aids
researchers in finding drugs and treatments to
improve health and medicine.

Many medical treatments have been made possible
by animal testing, including cancer and HIV drugs,
insulin, antibiotics, vaccines and many more.

It is for this reason that animal testing is
considered vital for improving human health and it
is also why the scientific community and many
members of the public support its use.

In fact, there are also individuals who are against
animal testing for cosmetics but still support animal
testing for medicine and the development of new
drugs for disease.
 Moral
philosophers have debated the
relative ethical importance of animals as
compared to human beings.
 On
the one hand there are those who
argue they simply do not have any moral
significance, such as Michael A. Fox.
 He
held that we have no duty towards
animals at all.
 Defined
members of the moral community
as those who could make free rational
decisions and were truly persons.
What about
children,
disable people
or people who
are unable to
respond such
as those in a
coma?
 Fox
eventually retracted his view but
others have not.
 Cohan
only attributes rights to human
beings.
 Like
Fox, Cohan thought that animals
lacked the basic elements that made
humans moral persons.
 Humans
are free rational creatures, able
to engage with moral dilemmas.
 Animals
have not of these things
Defining
personhood is
notoriously
difficult as
several
categories of
humans do not
always show
these
characteristics,
such as
newborn babies
or those with
serious mental
disabilities, but
we still think it
is important to
care for these
people.

Animal testing helps to ensure the safety of drugs
and many other substances humans use or are
exposed to regularly.

Drugs in particular can carry significant dangers
with their use but animal testing allows
researchers to initially gauge the safety of drugs
prior to commencing trials on humans.

This means that human harm is reduced and human
lives are saved - not simply from avoidance of the
dangers of drugs but because the drugs themselves
save lives as well as improve the quality of human
life.
 Scientists
typically use animals for testing
purposes because they are considered similar
to humans.
 As
such, researchers do recognise the
limitations and differences but the testing is
done on animals because they are thought to
be the closest match and best one with regards
to applying this data to humans.

Tom Regan’s classic example of the
survivors in the lifeboat shows a midway
position.

He still objects to thinking about animals
in terms of things to be used for our
pleasure as they have their own lives,
even if such lives are different and more
limited than ours, although he concedes
that ultimately humans are more
important.

Animals thus have some moral weighting
but not quite as much as humans, while
Cohan rejects any moral consideration of
animals.
Regan: Imagine
five survivors are
on a lifeboat.
Because of limits
of size, the boat
can only support
four. All weigh
approximately the
same and would
take approximately
the same amount
of space. Four of
the five are normal
adult human
beings. The fifth is
a dog. One should
be thrown
overboard or else
all will perish.
Whom should it
be?

David Degrazia 2002 writes about cat sex
experiments carried out for 17 years, beginning in
1960, by scientists at the American Museum of
Natural History in New York City.

These experiments involved the mutilation of cats
in various ways including the removal of parts of
their brains and destroying senses of smell or touch
by cutting nerves in their sex organs.

The scientists then evaluated the cats’ sexual
performance.

This work was funded by the US Government but,
Degrazia writes, how this work might have
benefited any human being was difficult to fathom.

The very idea that it should have led to benefit
was queried by the museum’s director.

Thomas Nicholson, who felt the freedom to
experiment was enough.

He argued the search for knowledge should never
be constrained by concerns for animal well-being.

Few of the articles published as a result of these
experiments were ever cited in other research.

Other experiments were carried out on monkeys
seem equally questionable.

Infant monkeys were deprived of their mothers at
birth and observed to see what would happen.

This often produced abnormal behaviour such as
self clasping, rocking and convulsive jerking.
(similar experiments were conducted on human
babies by the Nazis)

However, in this case the findings were significant.

This research led to conclusions that separation
from mothers at birth had profoundly negative
effects and while this may seem blindingly obvious
to us now, it is worth remembering that little more
than 30 years ago in Britain, newborn babies were
separated from the mothers soon after birth and
placed in rooms with all the other newborn babies,
only to brought out to their mothers for feeding.

The ethical challenge here is how could conclusions
be reached without testing on animals?
In animal testing, countless animals are
experimented on and then killed after their use.
 Others are injured and will still live the
remainder of their lives in captivity.
 The unfortunate aspect is that many of these
animals received tests for substances that will
never actually see approval or public
consumption and use.
 It is this aspect of animal testing that many
view as a major negative against the practice.
This aspect seems to show the idea that the
animal died in vain because no direct benefit to
humans occurred from the animal testing.


Singer takes a stronger position with his
argument.

He claims all suffering should be given
moral significance, even equality,
irrespective of the creature that suffers.

Treating human suffering as important
while at the same time disregarding animal
suffering is imply ‘speciesist’, a form of
racism.

It is this kind of moral inequality which
justified the slave trade and vindicates the
poor treatment of women or foreigners or
anyone else who seems a bit different.
If we are willing
to conduct
experiments on
animals we
should be willing
to do so on
humans. These
experiments
cause pain and
we are happy to
cause such pain
for food, clothes
and
experimentation
in the case of
animals. If we
are to be
consistent and
fair we should do
the same to
humans or not at
all.

Another con on the issue of animal testing is the sheer
cost.

Animal testing generally costs an enormous amount of
money. Animals must be fed, housed, cared for and
treated with drugs or a similar experimental substance.

The controlled environment is important but it comes
with a high cost.

On top of that, animal testing may occur more than once
and over the course of months, which means that
additional costs are incurred.

The price of animals themselves must also be factored
into the equation. There are companies who breed
animals specifically for testing and animals can be
purchased through them.

the reaction of a drug in an animal's body is
quite different from the reaction in a human.

some believe animal testing is unreliable.

Following on that criticism is the premise
that because animals are in an unnatural
environment, they will be under stress.

Therefore, they won't react to the drugs in
the same way compared to their potential
reaction in a natural environment. This
argument further weakens the validity of
animal experimentation.

The current climate for animal
experimentation requires that some benefit
might come from experimentation.

It may lead to no significant knowledge at
all, but that can only be discovered for
certain after trying and, historically,
advances have been made on the basis of
animal experimentation.

Degrazia notes that animal testing receives
much greater public criticism than factory
farming, though morally the potential to do
good from medical advances might be
stronger than having cheap food.

Arguments remain about the benefits of
animal experimentation.

On the one hand advocates suggest that
animal studies have helped the development
of countless new therapies and techniques.

Progress has been made in areas such as
Alzheimer's, AIDS, cancer, haemophilia,
malaria, organ transplantation etc.

Animal medicines and treatments have also
been developed.

Humans are not the same as other animals. It
is difficult to judge the likelihood of
potential developments. This is an
unquantifiable moral variable which
complicates the issues:

Are harmful means justified by good ends? Is the
suffering of animals justified by the good that
comes from the discoveries made by study of that
suffering?

What moral significance should be given to
animals? Do any animals have similar status to
human beings? Can animals be used for some
human benefits?

Advocates of testing can point to
previous examples of developments
which have needed such
experimentation, but that is only
because such experimentation was
allowed.

The difficulty we have in evaluating
these moral arguments is that we live in
a world where experimentation is
permitted; we can only imagine the
opposite.

It is hard to make a decision one way or
the other with that uncertainty in mind.
The same
argument was
used for the
slave trade, the
abolishment of
anti
discriminatory
laws and other
morally suspect
actions of
humans.
It is only when
these conflicting
moral issues
were outlawed
did we really
make progress.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Are harmful means justified by good ends?
What moral significance should be given to
animals and are some animals more morally
significant than others? If so on what basis?
‘Animal testing is nasty but necessary.’
Discuss
The public are outraged by medical science
when it experiments on animals but are
happy to buy cheap food from factory farms
where animals are treated with cruelty.
They are hypocritical. Discuss
 Animal
experimentation is not the same
as animal welfare, vegetarianism or the
hunting debate.
 It might be that you are passionate about
these issues and that you can make them
fit into the answer in the exam, but be
careful that you are still answering the
question set and not one that you would
prefer to answer.
1.
Statistics about animal experimentation
2.
The use and history of animal experimentation
3.
Arguments for:
Helps research
 Animals do not matter as much as people
 Ensures the safety of drugs
 Similar results to humans

Arguments against:
4.





Does not consider animal welfare
specieist
unreliable
Cost
Waste of life
 To
know and understand what embryo
experimentation is.
 To know and understand the arguments for
and against embryonic testing
KEY WORDS
Embryo
experimentation
Cybrid embryo
Degenerative
disease
KEY
PHILOSOPHERS
Singer utilitarianism
Richard Doerflinger

Legal limits on embryo research

Develops as a result of embryo research

Arguments for:



The embryo as a potential person
The human embryo is no different than sperm or
eggs
Arguments against:
The human embryo has clear features that
indicate it is an individual being
 How we treat imperfect embryos will reflect how
we treat imperfect born humans

 Embryo
experimentation is the use of
human embryos for medical testing
purposes.
 These
embryos the bi-product of IVF have
been donated by people who have no use
for them anymore.
 Embryos
testing.
 Legally
are not fertilised specifically for
they can only be used before they
are 14 days old.

A general starting point for an ethical
discussion about embryo research is that the
law says “you should not use embryos for
research unless there is a good reason to do
so”. Two possible reasons are:
1.
Animals because of the distinct difference
genetic between animals and humans are
not completely suitable subject for medical
testing.
2.
An animal experiences pain, whereas an
embryo does not.

When considering the ethical question we
can also ask about the nature of the
research being undertaken.

It is often difficult for all outcomes to be
known at the outset of research.

You do not know what you are going to
find until you have done the research.

It is argued that embryo experimentation
has the potential to find cures for serious
illnesses by using tissue or cells from
embryos.

It is possible that such work might help
with the treatment of those with
Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease,
diabetes and Parkinson's disease
Embryo
experimentation
A term that can
cause confusion.
For the sake of
this topic, what
is being referred
to is
experimentation
on the entity
which exists up
to the
appearance of
the primitive
streak, at about
14 days.
Sometimes this
phase is called
the
‘pre-embryonic’.

Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia,
affecting around 417,000 people in the UK. The term
'dementia' is used to describe the symptoms that occur when
the brain is affected by specific diseases and conditions. This
factsheet outlines the symptoms and risk factors for
Alzheimer's disease, and describes what treatments are
currently available.

Alzheimer's disease, first described by the German
neurologist Alois Alzheimer, is a physical disease affecting
the brain. During the course of the disease, 'plaques' and
'tangles' develop in the structure of the brain, leading to the
death of brain cells. People with Alzheimer's also have a
shortage of some important chemicals in their brains. These
chemicals are involved with the transmission of messages
within the brain.

Alzheimer's is a progressive disease, which means that
gradually, over time, more parts of the brain are damaged.
As this happens, the symptoms become more severe.

Huntington's disease (also referred to in more formal
medical research as Huntington Disease) is an
hereditary neurological disorder of the central nervous
system that causes progressive degeneration of cells in
the brain, slowly impairing a person's ability to walk,
think, talk and reason.

It is caused by a single defective gene on chromosome
4. This leads to damage of the nerve cells in areas of
the brain including the basal ganglia and cerebral
cortex, and to the gradual onset of physical, mental
and emotional changes.
between 6,500 and 8,000 people in the UK have the
disease.
by the time symptoms appear, the person has often
had a family and may have passed on the gene to their
children.



Parkinson's is a degenerative disease of the brain that
affects the nerve cells involved in movement.

Parkinson's is caused by the loss of brain cells that
produce dopamine, an important neurotransmitter (a
chemical that carries signals between the neurons in
the brain), which enables us to perform smooth,
coordinated movements.
A person with Parkinson's will only develop symptoms
once around 80 per cent of these cells are lost, so they
may have had the condition for some time before
problems come to attention
Beginning an activity may be difficult as the person
affected is rigid and slow to get going. But once
started people with Parkinson's speed up and move too
fast, ending up almost running or out of control.



The potential to cure degenerative disorders
has led to increasing pressure to extend what is
permissible in embryo research and
experimentation.

IVF itself is underpinned by such research and
would not be possible without it.

Recently, politicians in the UK voted to extend
the research done on human embryos to allow
stem cells to be taken from embryos at a very
early stage of development, in the hope that
this may lead to radical improvements in the
treatment of a number of degenerative
diseases.
Degenerative
disease:
illness that is
characterised
by
progressive
deterioration
.
IVF: in-vitro
fertilisation
 There
are legal limits on embryo
experimentation. A number of practices
are prohibited in the UK. You cannot:

Keep an embryo past the primitive streak
at 14 days

Place a human embryo in an animal

Replace the nucleus of a cell of an embryo
with another person (human cloning)

Alter the genetic structure of any cell while
it forms part of an embryo (human genetic
engineering)
primitive
streak:
The
thickening in
the surface
of the
embryo. It
results in the
first stages of
embryonic
development.
 Two
recent developments have brought
embryo research into the public arena
again: firstly the development of stem
cell research and secondly the
development of human-animal cybrid
embryos.
 Embryonic
stem cells are thought by
scientists to be particularly valuable
because of their regenerative and indeed
generative capacity.
 In
2005, embryonic stem cells were used
to heal broken spines in rats (Medical
News Today, 2005)
Cybrid
embryo:
A humananimal
embryo.
Embryonic
stem cells:
a primitive
kind of cell
which goes on
to develop
into any of the
cells in the
body.
 Research
in 2007 has indicated that it may be
possible to reverse age-related muscle
degeneration which has caused 14 million
people in Europe to become blind.
 Scientists
believe that within five years a
treatment will have been developed to cure
these people of their blindness.(metro, 2007)
 Scientists
believe that in relatively short
period of time embryonic stem cell research
is already showing benefits that could soon
provide important treatments for many
people who are currently suffering.

While it is sometimes claiming that adult stem cells may
provide cures, thus avoiding the need to use human
embryos (adult stem cells can be extracted without
harming the adult person), many scientists believe that
they will not offer such solutions.

A bill passing through parliament in May 2008 supported
the creation of human-animal cybrid embryos.

This involved the insertion of a nucleus of a human cell
inside a hollowed-out cow ovum.

Scientists again believe that through a better
understanding of the development of embryos at the
molecular level new treatments for degenerative
diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and motor
neurone diseases will be developed.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority
(HFEA) grants licences for embryo research only if:

‘it is satisfied that the use of human embryos is
necessary or desirable for the purposes of the
research and may only be allowed for one of the
following purposes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
To promote advances in the treatment infertility.
To increase knowledge about the causes of
congenital disease
To increase knowledge about the cause of
miscarriages
To develop more effective techniques of
contraception.
To develop methods for detecting the presence of
gene of chromosome abnormalities.
1.
2.
List the purposes given on the previous
slide in order of importance in your
view, and decide which if any make a
more convincing case for embryo
research.
Justify your conclusions.
for
 The
argument in favour of embryo research
is that before the primitive streak an embryo
is NOT THE SAME AS A PERSON.
 It
has value but not the same as an older
entity.
 At
14 days the embryo has no features we
would expect in a human.
 The
embryo has no consciousness and no
nervous system.
The British Humanist
Association agrees:
 Peter
Singer writes that it is
possible to argue that up to 14
days after fertilisation an
embryo (as opposed to a foetus)
is not a human being.
 Before
14 days we cannot be
sure if the embryo is going to
split therefore we cannot be
sure if it is going to be one
entity of two.
At the early stage, an
embryo has few of the
characteristics we
associate with a person. It
is a fertilized human egg,
with the capacity to
develop into a person , but
its cells have not yet
begun to form into
specialist cells that would
form particular parts of
the body. There is no
brain, no self-awareness,
no way of feeling pain or
emotion, so an early stage
embryo cannot suffer.
What type of
argument is
this?

Its use is justified because of a need, possibly to
undertake experimentation which cannot be
carried out on animal embryos, and more often
with a view to making discoveries which will bring
about treatments for people who are suffering
from terrible diseases and other conditions.

It is the combination of these two ethical
principles which underpin embryo
experimentation: that the entity has no value as a
human before it has the primitive streak, and the
benefits of the science, OUTWEIGH the ethical
concerns

Singer also argues that recognising
an embryo as a human being is
equivalent to including sperm and
eggs.

They too could be seen as potential
human beings, which simply require
a human action for their potential to
be realised.

He notes that once an embryo is
isolated in the laboratory, it too
requires human action for its
potential to be realised and so he
does not see that an embryo is very
different from sperm or eggs.
The laboratory
example:
He gives an example
of a laboratory
assistant who tips
some sperm and an
egg down a sink and
then notices later
that the sink is
blocked. According to
those who argue from
the position of
potential to two may
well have formed an
embryo so it is wrong
to clear the blockage.
 Even
if the embryo or foetus does
not have full human rights, it may
have some rights. If it feels pain,
then it has an interest in not
feeling pain. (Singer 1993)
 But
our knowledge of the activity
of the brain in the early embryo
and foetus is incomplete – which
might, for some, be enough to
apply a precautionary rule based
on the chance that pain might be
caused which we cannot detect.
If the entity were to
feel pain, then its
feelings should be
taken into
consideration.
However, because it
has no conscious
awareness of pain it
is morally
permissible to
conduct research on
embryos.
There is less pain
caused then testing
on animals!
against
Others reject
the devaluing
of the entity
prior to 14
days. They
note that even
by day 7 there
are observable
features of
humanity

the formation of the embryonic disk, and within
that disk the epiblast, at about day seven, is a
differentiation at least equally significant (as
that occurring at about day 14).

Indeed the inner cell mass has differentiated
from other parts of the embryo by about day 5,
and functional differentiation of the cells in the
embryo begins even earlier...

The fact that some days elapse before one can
identify which cells will become placenta and
which ‘embryo proper’ in no way justifies any
claim that during those days there is something
other than an individual, self-developing
human organism, fully continuous with – the
very same individual being as – the adult
human organism.

Christian absolutists who argue for full rights
from the point of conception do not believe that
uncertainty about whether it is one or two
beings is sufficient to merit the withdrawal of
rights from the embryo.

Biblical texts such as: Jeremiah 1:5, Galatians
1:15, Ephesians 1:4, Psalms 139 are often quoted
to argue that our existence is ordained by God.

Any interruption in the process of life interrupts
God’s plan for life and undermines the idea that
God’s image is reflected in each human being.
(genesis 1:27)
Genesis 4:1
Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she
became pregnant and gave birth to Cain.
She said, "With the help of the LORD I
have brought forth a man.
Genesis 1:27
27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
Jeremiah 1:5
Before you were formed in the body of
your mother I had knowledge of you,
and before your birth I made you holy; I
have given you the work of being a
prophet to the nations
Ephesians 1:4
4For
he chose us in him before the
creation of the world to be holy and
blameless in his sight.
Job 31:15
Did not God make him as well as me? did
he not give us life in our mothers' bodies?
Psalms 139
1 O LORD, you have searched me
and you know me. 2 You know
when I sit and when I rise;
you perceive my thoughts from
afar.
13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my
mother's womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully
and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret
place.
When I was woven together in
the depths of the earth.
 Because
the entity is a continuous life
form with the human it will become and
the entity that was fused with a soul at
conception, it is a person.
 Because
it is a person, termination or
experimentation on the entity is the same
ethical principle as murder or
experimentation on a full grown human
being.
 It
therefore, violates the sanctity of life
and is morally unacceptable.
Usually a
Catholic
argument but
does include
most
right-wing
Christian
groups
 Doerflinger
argues that we are heading
towards a totalitarian society
 This
desire for genetic perfection will
lead us to disastrous circumstances.
 if
we destroy embryos with genetic
defects why not destroy humans with
genetic defects?
 We
can justify anything in the name of
the “greater good”

“That way lies the moral approach of a
totalitarian society, that thinks it can use and
abuse individual human beings in accordance
with some grand scheme promising ‘the
greatest good for the greatest number’...
If, as modern embryology tells us...
[genetically defective embryos] are indeed
part of the continuum of human life, then
the notion that genetic flaws enable us to
destroy the ‘imperfect’ embryos has
implications for the equal dignity of human
beings after birth as well.”
There are number of concerns over the use of
embryos in research.
1. Should they be used to help people with
degenerative diseases that harm many
people?
2. Does this turn human embryos into a
commodity for the greater good of born
humans?
3. Should embryos have unique untouchable
status irrespective of any benefit that they
might give to others through
experimentation?


The debate over PERSONHOOD is an
important concept in this discussion, as it is
with abortion, and ultimately the view on
when an embryo gains rights will heavily
influence the ethical position that we take on
embryo research.

Concerns about the use of one human being
for another human being may come from the
Kantian principle of treating all people as
ends in themselves, a human rights ethic, or
a natural law principle to preserve and
protect innocent human life.

It is conceivable to incorporate a utilitarian
perspective into the natural law principle of
life preservation, so that very many future
lives are protected at the cost of a few lives
now, although this would go against
traditional formulations of natural law theory.

Advocates of embryo research will justify
their position on utilitarian grounds,
claiming that the betterment of the quality
and quantity of human life outweighs the
cost of using embryos, which they are likely
to consider as human beings.
1.
2.
3.
4.
List the purposes under which the HFEA
will grant a license for embryo research
in order of importance in your view.
Decide which if any make a more
convincing case for embryo research.
Justify your conclusions.
Use the internet to search for recent
reports of medical advances as a result
of the use of embryonic stem cell
research and adult stem cell research.
You should EXPLAIN the
main points of view.
 Examine
the
ethical issues
which arise from
animal and human
experimentation.
 30 marks
 Use
the reading
pack to help you.
Make sure you show an
understanding of the
diversity of belief and
reasons for diversity.
Make sure you explain
each point fully,
developing it with
evidence and linking the
paragraphs together to
create a full picture of
the different points of
view.

Legal limits on embryo research

Develops as a result of embryo research

Arguments for:



The embryo as a potential person
The human embryo is no different than sperm or
eggs
Arguments against:
The human embryo has clear features that
indicate it is an individual being
 How we treat imperfect embryos will reflect how
we treat imperfect born humans

 To
consider the ethical concern over new
inventions
 To consider if science should control ethics or
should ethics control science
KEY WORDS
Invention
KEY
PHILOSOPHERS
Unregulated
environment
SAGAN

As well as science ethics needs to control the
development of technologies.

Despite the benefit of technologies we have
seen the destructive power of them.

Once a technology exists somebody will use
it.

If we can’t uninvent an idea then we should
regulate their use.

Again, ethics must be in control if we are to
avoid undesirable consequences.
Whether
we will acquire the
understanding and wisdom
necessary to come to grips
with the scientific revelations
of the 20th century will be the
most profound.
Carl Sagan
 Human
beings have invented and
developed extraordinary technologies but
they have also demonstrated that they can
put such technology to horrific uses.
 The
development of Zyclone B gas was to
make extermination of the Jews more
efficient.
 After
learning how to split the atom we
turned it into a bomb and dropped it on
people.
 Once
a technology becomes theoretically
possible we will it would seem that human
beings inevitably develop and use the
technology.
 Once
it became possible to carry out
embryo research, such research began.
 It
could be argued that once we can clone
human beings, someone somewhere in the
world will clone them.
 Once
a thing becomes possible it is done.
 Atom
bombs, genetic engineering, embryo
research, cloning, etc.
 Opponents
of new technologies argue that
they should be abandoned.
 So
for instance, all nuclear weapons should
be dismantled or cloning prohibited.
 However,
once knowledge exists, perhaps
human beings will always find a way of
testing it out.
 Arguably,
the only difference is that the
benefits of the technological developments
will be privately owned by the company
which developed them and not as available
to the scientific community in more
regulated countries.
 In
fact they may be misused as they will have
been developed in an unregulated
environment.

As in the case of nuclear weapons, it has been
argued that once invented a country should try
to acquire them in order to protect itself from
other countries which already have them

They cannot be uninvented

Even if every country destroyed their nuclear
weapons, the knowledge would still exist for a
rich terrorists to build one and then hold the
world to ransom.

Arguably it is better that new technologies are
controlled in a regulated environment agreed by
the international community.

Perhaps millionaires will be able to go to some
independent island for genetic improvement
treatments, essentially giving technological
benefits to the rich and powerful.

If this was to happen, there could be a divide
between the ‘super haves’ and the ‘have nots’ as
rich people evolved in new ways while poorer
ones did not.

The dilemma facing governments is this: if they
do not allow technological developments, will
those developments simply become secret
operations undertaken by the rich?
 We
can’t uninvent inventions
 We
should regulate the use and
development of such technologies.
 This
way we can ensure that they are not
misused.
 What
do you think?
 Research
what Christianity teaches about
new inventions
 Find
five new technological
advancements, explain and consider their
ethical problems. They should not be
similar in origin.
 i.e.
cloning and genetic engineering are
too similar.

As well as science ethics needs to control the
development of technologies.

Despite the benefit of technologies we have
seen the destructive power of them.

Once a technology exists somebody will use
it.

If we can’t uninvent an idea then we should
regulate their use.

Again, ethics must be in control if we are to
avoid undesirable consequences.
 To
know and understand the pressures facing
scientific research
 To know why it is important that scientists
are liable for their work
KEY WORDS
Freedom of thought
Conflict of interests
Republic of science
KEY
PHILOSOPHERS
weinberg
1.
There are a number of pressures facing scientists.
2.
They must balance the pressures of business (money)
and society (fear) with their ethical concerns.
3.
Science should not bow to pressure and to stop this
they must be responsible for the work they are
carrying out.
4.
It we do force them to bow to pressure we could be
limiting freedom of thought and the chance of
advancement.
5.
Sometimes pressure comes because society does not
understand the science and is scared of the
technologies.
6.
There is no bad science, just bad people who use it.

Scientists face ethical decisions and pressures.

When conducting research it is possible for there
to be a conflict of interests.

A researcher might have a financial interest in a
particular company.

They might be funded to carry out research to
show the particular benefits of a certain product.

It is essential that the science determines the
result of the research and is not influenced by the
generosity of the funding.

A bad researcher might have a harmful
effect on the stock value of the company,
but false research could endanger lives.

Research institutions have codes of conduct
for conflict of interests

professionals, such as doctors, can be
reprimanded by their professional
organisations if they break the rules.

Publication and openness is an important
ethical principle in scientific professional
ethics.
 If
negative results are hidden then the
public standing of science is undermined.
 How
would any private funded research
ever be trusted by the general public if
only the positive reports were published?
 Scientists
may also be pressurised to
produce results quickly because of the
cost of research, which is often very high,
and haste can lead to errors.
 Alvin
Weinberg describes the ethical side of
science in terms of being a citizen in the
‘republic of science’.
 Of
all the traits which qualify a scientist for
citizenship in the ‘Republic of Science’. I
would put a sense of responsibility at the
very top. A scientist can be brilliant,
imaginative, clever with his hands, profound,
broad, narrow – but he is not much as a
scientist unless he is responsible.
 Weinberg
 If
a society exerts too much control over
science then developments and discoveries
may be lost.
 In
the past religious authorities have exerted
pressure on scientists when their findings
conflicted with truth as religion perceived it.
 If
I produce research which shows that my
religion’s creation story is not scientifically
true, am I going to cause instability and
anxiety by disseminating my discoveries?
 Science
is highly complex and may not be
understood by the majority of people or
an ill-educated public.
 Scientists
are often asked to say that a
procedure or drug cannot do any harm.
 Instead
they say 99% because this is more
like the truth.
 People
may react emotively to new
technologies because they do not
understand the uses.
 Transplant
surgery is an example of this –
but it is an extremely important lifesaving area of surgery.
 It
would be wrong to prevent certain
developments due to this sort of
squeamishness.
 Is
this right?
 One
of the challenges for science is that by
definition, trying new things, so there is
always a chance that the scientist will go
further than the general public is willing to
go.
 Scientists
have a responsibility to educate
and inform and help the public understand
new directions.
 There
must also be recognition by scientists
that sometimes, even though we can do
something, that does not mean that we
should.
 Research
the history of cloning.
 What are the main features of the science
behind it.
 How does it differ from genetic
engineering?
You should EVALUATE
the main points of view.
 ‘Ethics
has no part
to play in the fields
of science and
technology.’
 Consider
how far
you agree with this
claim. Discuss
 20
marks
 Use
the reading
pack to help you.
Give four arguments –
two for and two
against.
Make sure you explain
each point fully,
developing it with
evidence and linking the
paragraphs together to
fully evaluate the point.
Include a person
conclusion.
1.
There are a number of pressures facing scientists.
2.
They must balance the pressures of business (money)
and society (fear) with their ethical concerns.
3.
Science should not bow to pressure and to stop this
they must be responsible for the work they are
carrying out.
4.
It we do force them to bow to pressure we could be
limiting freedom of thought and the chance of
advancement.
5.
Sometimes pressure comes because society does not
understand the science and is scared of the
technologies.
6.
There is no bad science, just bad people who use it.
 To
know and understand what the different
types of cloning are
KEY WORDS
Reproductive
Therapeutic
Stem cell
KEY QUESTION:
Would your
clone have the
same
personality?
 Cloning
creates a genetically identical
copy of a being.
 Dolly
the sheep was the first clone made
from an adult cell.
 There
are two types of cloning
 Therapeutic:
cloning particular cells,
cloning organs
 Reproductive:
cloning an individual as an
alternative to IVF

On February 1997, Ian Wilmot and
his fellow scientists at the Roslin
institute near Edinburgh
announced to the world that they
had cloned a lamb named Dolly.

Pictures of Dolly were on the front
page of every newspaper in the
world!

At the time there was a media
frenzy, which quickly turned into
panic.
Dolly died after 6 years. She
had a life expectancy of 12
years. She died of lung
cancer, which is common for
a sheep that is kept indoors
as she had been.
These claims
have since
shown to be
false

There was an ethical outcry and many
governments took action to prevent the
technology being used to clone human beings,

In march 2001 an Italian doctor claimed that he
was only months away from starting to clone
babies for infertile couples.

There are a number of strong medical arguments
in favour of the use of cloning technologies, as
well as ethical and religious arguments against.

Understanding these arguments requires a basic
understanding of the science behind it.
 Cloning
is the creation of an embryo using
the genetic material from another being.
 Cloning
technologies uses embryos because
they are a rich source of a special type of
cell called a stem cell.
 Stem
cells can replicate themselves and
generate more-specialised cell types as they
multiply.
 Stem
cells from an embryo are much more
versatile than those from an adult.

The procedure works by taking a fertilised ovum
(an embryo) with its stem cells, removing the
genetic contents of that ovum and replacing
them with the genes from another animal.

You could take an ovum that has been fertilised
by male A and female B.

You would then replace the newly created
genetic material (combining the elements from
male A and female B) in that ovum with the
genetic material from male C.

The result would be a genetic copy of male C.
Remove genetic
content
A
Genetic
copy of
person C
B
Add new genetic
material from
person C
 There
are two different types of cloning.
 THERAPEUTIC
CLONING: cloning for
medical purposes. Creating genetically
identical organs, genetically identical
stem cells for gene therapy and treatment
for degenerative diseases.
 REPRODUCTIVE
CLONING: cloning a full
human being in order to solve
reproductive problems for individuals.

Medical benefits are:
1.
treatment for degenerative diseases. The
human body’s specialised cells cannot be
replaced by natural processes. Medical
conditions that seriously damage them or leave
them diseased – such as Alzheimer’s disease
and Parkinson’s disease – are particularly
difficult to treat.
2.
There is an acute shortage of donated healthy
organs, and cloning technology could be used
to grow the required cell tissue using stem
cells.

In the long term there could be considerable potential for
the use of tissues derived from stem cells in the treatment
of a wide range of disorders by replacing cells that have
become damaged or diseased. Examples might include the
use of insulin-secreting cells for diabetes; nerve cells in
stroke or Parkinson’s, disease or liver cells to repair a
damaged organ...

in addition to this potential to develop tissue for use in the
repair of failing organs, or for the replacement of diseased
or damaged tissues, the technique of cell nuclear
replacement might be applied to treat some rare but
serious inherited disorders. Repairing a woman’s eggs
(oocytes) by this technique gives rise to the possibility of
having a woman with mitochondrial damage to give birth to
a healthy child which inherits her genes together with those
of her partner.

Department of Health 2000
 The
Research is
being
undertaken
possible benefits have been used by
scientists to encourage the British
government to permit research into
therapeutic cloning using embryo stem cells,
and in 2004 the HFEA issued the first licence
to do so.
 The permit is given with a particular focus on
increasing understanding and developing
treatments for mitochondrial diseases and it
involved stem cells derived from embryonic
sources.
Therapeutic cloning produces stem cells that can develop into different
types of body cell.
Nucleus
removed
Stem cells
harvested from
embryo cell
Cell
retained
Fertilised
ovum
(egg cell)
Nucleus
inserted into
egg cell
Body cell
Cloned cell induced
to form embryo
Different possible applications
including treatment of patients with
genetic disorders
 Cloning
could also be used to create a
complete human being.
 This
would benefit those who cannot
reproduce naturally, and for whom IVF
does not work.
 It
is also of benefit to homosexual couples
who can clone themselves and raise the
clone as a child.





Read the following extract:
Step forward to a dinner party in 2025. your hostess
warns you that the tomatoes are the new cholesterol
reducing ones. Your host grumbles as he eats only
organic food. Your gay neighbour tells you how his clone
(should you think of it as his son or brother?) is doing at
school.
Somebody mentions the amount the Smiths have paid to
make sure their next daughter has blue eyes. Would not
it have been better spent on making her musical?
Somebody jokes about the couple who could have had a
Margaret Thatcher clone but instead chose a Bill Clinton.
On the drive back, the headlines are about attempts to
raise the retirement age to 95.
1.
Identify the different moral issues raised by this
extract.
2.
Is genetic engineering ‘playing at God’ or is it
exercising morally valid scientific freedom? Why?
3.
Should cloning technologies be used to determine
features of our children? Why?
4.
Should the technology be used to help infertile
couples? Why?
5.
Would you be happy to have a clone made from
your genes? Why?
6.
Would you be happy knowing that you were the
clone of a parent?
 There
are a number of ethical concerns
about cloning.
 These
concerns are both religious and nonreligious.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Can cause abnormalities
Limits genetic diversity
Violates the sanctity of life
Could create social inequalities
 Cloning
creates a genetically identical
copy of a being.
 Dolly
the sheep was the first clone made
from an adult cell.
 There
are two types of cloning
 Therapeutic:
cloning particular cells,
cloning organs
 Reproductive:
cloning an individual as an
alternative to IVF
 To
know and understand the arguments for
and against cloning
KEY WORDS
KEY
PHILOSOPHERS
Ethical gradualism
Sentience
Gregory E Pense
abnormalities
Leon Kass
Against
1.
Limits genetic diversity
2.
Could create an unequal society
3.
Creates genetic abnormalities
4.
Problems for crimes
5.
Violates the sanctity of life
6.
Could harm society
7.
Turns reproduction into manufacturing
For
1.
Helps cure diseases
2.
Can’t feel pain
3.
No new ethical problem
4.
Worth the risk
against

Cloning created identical genes.

It is a process of replicating a genetic
constitution, thus hampering the diversity in
genes.

While lessening the diversity in genes, we
weaken our ability of adaptation.

The more clones we have in society the less
diversity we have.

We could effectively halt the process of
evolution!!!

Therapeutic cloning when developed will be
highly expensive. The cloning of organs will
be particularly expensive.

These advantages in medical technology will
therefore, only be available to the rich and
as such creating a two tier society.

As well as this, is it ethical for the NHS to
spend the billions it would on therapeutic
cloning when cheaper treatments are
available?

Will cloned organs be cost-effective?

Due to the inefficiency of animal cloning (only
about 1 or 2 viable offspring for every 100
experiments) and the lack of understanding about
reproductive cloning, many scientists and
physicians strongly believe that it would be
unethical to attempt to clone humans.

Not only do most attempts to clone mammals fail,
about 30% of clones born alive are affected with
"large-offspring syndrome" and other debilitating
conditions. Several cloned animals have died
prematurely from infections and other
complications.

The same problems would be expected in human
cloning.

In addition, scientists do not know how
cloning could impact mental development.

While factors such as intellect and mood may
not be as important for a cow or a mouse,
they are crucial for the development of
healthy humans.

With so many unknowns concerning
reproductive cloning, the attempt to clone
humans at this time is considered potentially
dangerous and ethically irresponsible.
 Modern
police work is now heavily reliant
on DNA.
 The
security of this evidence is based on
the individuality of DNA.
 By
cloning individuals we will decrease
the reliability of this evidence as DNA will
no longer but a unique feature of a
person.

Christians believe that life is sacred.

They believe there is something special or
holy about human life. Every human,
Christians believe, is special to God.

In order to create a clone, a number of
embryos must be fertilised. The best is taken.

The others are discarded.

Humans are so from conception, therefore,
cloning violates the Sanctity of Life.
 Even
thought the ‘end is good’ ‘the means
are immoral’ as the creation of numerous
embryos to aid implantation results in the
death of ‘tiny cloned human beings’.
 Former
Roman Catholic leader of Scotland

It has always been accepted in British law that the
earliest human embryo should be treated with
respect and accorded a special status.

To use the human embryo for basic science
research that has not yet been undertaken in
animals would end the special status that embryos
deserve.

Therapeutic cloning could become possible from
adult cells in the future, which would save the
lives of the embryos used in the research.

Also, if we start with therapeutic cloning,
reproductive cloning will result.

It could have a harmful impact on human
society, the family or the child.

This is a religious consequentialist argument.

Leon Kass sees the common repugnance that
people express towards cloning as a revolt
against the excess of human wilfulness and a
warning not to do something that is
profoundly unspeakable.

It is a sign that human nature no longer
commands respect.
 Kass
states:
 Human
cloning will harm the created
child by threatening a confusion of
identity and individuality because, ‘she is
the work not of nature or nature’s God
bur of man, an Englishman.
 Because
the cloned person will be in
genotype and appearance identical to
another human being, possibly a parent,
the child will have a crisis of identity.
 Human
cloning represents a step towards
turning reproduction into manufacturing:
‘if sex has no intrinsic connection to
generating babies, babies nee have no
necessary connection to sex.’ (Kass)
 In
natural sexual reproduction, each child
has two complimentary biological
progenitors.
 Cloning
turns begetting into making.
 Procreation
becomes manufacture, which
makes man another part of man-made
things.
 In
natural procreation, human beings
come together, complementarily male and
female, to give existence to another being
who is formed.
A
cloned human being is a product of
intention and design.

Finally, Kass argues that cloning represents a
form of despotism of the cloners over the
cloned, and represents a blatant violation of
the inner meaning parent-child relationships.
A child stems from and unites two lineages.

The exact genetic constitution is decided by
nature and chance, not human design.

He believes that these biological truths
express truths about our identity and our
human condition.

Reproduction that does not involve sex is not
natural and rejects common family relations.
 Rejects
not only human cloning but
therapeutic cloning:
 It
is my view the creation and use of
cloned embryos for procedures such as
these should not be allowed... I believe
we should stop in our tracks, and not
continue to use embryos routinely for cell
therapy.
 He
argues that it is not consistent to
allow an embryo to be created but then
prevent it from coming to full term.
 It
is wrong to create an embryo as a
resource for others.
 It
should be afforded dignity in itself.
 Bruce
also voices concern about ‘ethical
gradualism’ – allowing far-reaching ethical
processes by a series of small steps, the
first of which is therapeutic cloning.
for

We are at an impasse with regard to many
degenerative disorders.

We need new technologies to help us save lives.
Supporters of cloning argue principally for the use
of medical research, on the basis that the results
will bring such benefit as to merit the medical
process that the embryos have to go through.

The overall benefits of cloning, the possible
treatments that could be made available to
sufferers of conditions such as Alzheimer's and
Parkinson's disease, far outweigh any objections
to the use of embryos in experimentation and
research.

One possible use of cloning is to help people
who cannot conceive children.

They could use donor eggs and sperm in order
to obtain the necessary embryonic stem cells
and then replace the genetic imprint.

The resulting child would be a genetic copy
of the mother.

Note that, normally, new life has a unique
genetic imprint and is made up of elements
from both the parents.

This is not the case in the this example.
 In
his article “will cloning harm people?”
Gregory E Pense states that human
cloning would not be harmful as embryos
cannot be harmed.
 This
is a utilitarian response.
 While
many embryos will be lost during
reproductive cloning this does not cause
any harm.
 40
per cent of human embryos fail to
implant in normal sexual reproduction.

The issue with cloning is one of double
standards.

Thousands of embryos can be stored and
many couples decline to pay fees for
preserved embryos. So they are destroyed.

We are using double standards as we are
morally concerned by the destruction of
frozen embryos, while unconcerned with the
loss of embryos as a result of failed
implantations.
 In
his view, embryos are not sentient and
cannot experience pain.
 They
are not persons and so there is no
objection to their use in cloning.
 Pence
believes that the objection to
human cloning is an irrational fear of
science and things that general public do
not understand.
 In
‘dolly’s fashion and Lois’s passion’
Stephen Jay Gould, a Harvard
Palaeontologist, argues that there are no
new ethical questions raised by cloning.
 He suggests that identical twins share
more properties than Dolly did with her
mother.
 Conjoined twins differ in personalities and
achievements, and so human cloning
raises no new ethical questions.

We know that identical twins are distinct
individuals, albeit with peculiar and
extensive similarities. We give them different
names. They encounter divergent
experiences and fates.

Their lives wander along disparate paths of
the world’s complex vagaries.

They grow up as distinctive and undoubted
individuals, yet they stand forth as far better
clones than Dolly and her mother.
In “Wrongful life, federalism, and procreative
liberty,” the law professor John Robertson
argues that the use of cloning for
reproduction is entirely acceptable:
 If a couple is willing to take the risk that
embryos will not form or cleave, that they
will not implant, that there will be a high risk
of miscarriage, that the child will be born
with some defect, and that they will then
rear the child, it is hard to see why this is
any worse than the other practices that could
lead to physically-damaged offspring.

 He
sees reproductive cloning as another
reproductive technology alongside IVF.
 For
some people, it is their only
opportunity to have children.
 As
long as they are willing to look after
the child regardless then there is no issue
if the creation has massive abnormalities.
1.
2.
3.
What links the Roman
Catholic Church's
criticism of human
cloning with that of IVF,
abortion and embryo
research?
What other specifically
religious reasons are
there for opposing
human cloning?
How might human
cloning change our
understanding of sex,
and in your view, would
this be a negative or a
positive development?
4.
What possible harms
might human cloning
cause to the individual?
5.
What possible harm
might human cloning
cause to society?
6.
How might it be argued
that a clone raises no
more ethical questions
that an identical twin?
7.
Outline the argument
for a person’s right to
clone.
You should EVALUATE
the main points of view.
 Cloning
is morally
repugnant.
 Discuss
 20
marks
 Use
the reading
pack to help you.
Give four arguments –
two for and two
against.
Make sure you explain
each point fully,
developing it with
evidence and linking the
paragraphs together to
fully evaluate the point.
Include a person
conclusion.
Against
1.
Limits genetic diversity
2.
Could create an unequal society
3.
Creates genetic abnormalities
4.
Problems for crimes
5.
Violates the sanctity of life
6.
Could harm society
7.
Turns reproduction into manufacturing
For
1.
Helps cure diseases
2.
Can’t feel pain
3.
No new ethical problem
4.
Worth the risk
 To
know and understand the basis for human
rights
 To consider their importance as the new
foundation for ethics
KEY WORDS
KEY
PHILOSOPHERS
Human right
Self evident
Locke
postmodernism
Stoics
1.
What are some basic human rights?
2.
History of human rights
3.
Actual list of human rights
4.
The justification of human rights
5.
Their importance for today’s society
ZENO OF
CITIUM
 Human
rights have a history that
dates back to the Stoics’ in the
3rdC BCE
 They
believed in a universal
moral law
 This
‘moral law’ is what human
conduct can be judged against
 Our
actions or judgements should
be brought back into harmony
with this moral law.
How old are
human
rights then?
 Later
the Magna Carta (1215) put in
place the idea ‘right’ was not just
what the king did.
 The
Magna Carta is an English legal
charter.
 The
Magna Carta required King John of
England to; issue certain rights to
freemen, respect legal procedures,
and accept that his will could be
bound by the law.

In England, the Petition of Right 1628 and the
Bill of Rights 1689 suggests the view that human
beings are endowed with eternal and inalienable
rights.

In the 17th C John Locke argued that Human
individuals have certain rights including the right
to life, liberty and property.

Throughout British history there has been a long
tradition of trying to secure in law the rights of
the individual.

Why?
What
does this
mean?
 In
America the Declaration of Independence,
proclaimed by the 13 American Colonies on
4th July 1776, states that:
 ‘we
hold these truths to be self evident,
that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
 This
was followed by the declarations of
the Rights of Man (26th August 1789)
 This
was a fundamental document of the
French revolution which establishes
fundamental rights for French citizens
and all men without exception,
 It
defines ‘liberty’ as including the right
to free speech, freedom of association,
religious freedom, and freedom from
arbitrary arrest and confinement.
 The
Declaration arose directly from the
experience of the Second World War and
represents the first global expression of
rights to which all human beings are
entitled.
 It
sets out 30 rights which all humans are
entitled by virtue of BEING HUMAN.
 As
a requirement of being part of the EU
you must make the UDHR part of your
own legal code.
 Some
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
of these principles are:
equality before the law
Protection from arbitrary arrest
The right to a fair trail
Freedom from ex post facto criminal laws
Freedom of thought
Freedom of conscience and religion
Freedom of opinion and expression
Freedom of peaceful assembly and
association

The rights expressed in the UDHR take different forms.

Some generate duties that others have.


Other are powers that we might have in law


Such as the right to choose who will inherit your wealth
after your death
Some are freedoms or liberties


the right to have a loan repaid is a claim that generates a
duty to repay the loan.
such as not having to give evidence against your own
spouse, or evidence that might prejudice your case in
court.
Lastly, rights can be immunities or protections from
certain actions

Violence from another individual, slavery or discrimination
due to your political or religious views.
 The
challenge of a postmodern society,
where everything is permitted, is to create
an absolute basis of morality from which to
make ethical decisions.
A
person is given their rights based on one
principle:
1.
Being human
 This
is irrespective of age, gender, sex, race,
sexuality, disability or any other prejudice
possible.
 HR
are the manner by which we can
properly build a new ethic for the 21
Century.
1.
They are binding on countries
2.
Enforceable through the UN
3.
View every human as equal
4.
Give people the liberty they deserve and
5.
Do not require any political or religious
viewpoint
 They
simply are given to a person by virtue
of them being human.
1.
Research the Human Rights act.
2.
Identify the five you think are the most
important.
3.
Explain why you think that they are the
most important.
1.
What are some basic human rights?
2.
History of human rights
3.
Actual list of human rights
4.
The justification of human rights
5.
Their importance for today’s society
1.
2.
To know how new technologies are
challenging our basic Human Rights in
Britain
To consider the advantages and
disadvantages of these new technologies
KEY WORDS
Liberty
Privacy
Surveillance
KEY QUESTION
How far can the
state go without
invading your
privacy?
1.
Article 8
2.
Liberty and the 2000
report on
surveillance

Should have nothing to
hide

Acts as a deterrent
Targeted surveillance
and communications
data

Catches more
criminals

Availability of goods
3.
4.
5.
6.
Mass surveillance and
databases
Visual surveillance
and the big brother
state
Cyber crime
Advantages
Disadvantages

Article 8

Deterrents don’t work

Abuse of the system

Availability of goods
 2.
There shall be no interference by a
public authority with the exercise of this
right except such as is in accordance with
the law and is necessary in a democratic
society in the interests of national
security, public safety or the economic
well-being of the country, for the
prevention of disorder or crime, for the
protection of health or morals, or for the
protection of the rights and freedoms of
others.

Liberty, founded in 1934, is a organisation at the
heart of the movement for fundamental rights and
freedoms in England and Wales. They promote the
values of individual human dignity, equal
treatment and fairness as the foundations of a
democratic society.
They seeks to protect civil liberties and promote
human rights for everyone.
Liberty campaigns to protect basic rights and
freedoms through the courts, in Parliament and in
the wider community. They do this through a
combination of public campaigning, test case
litigation, parliamentary lobbying, policy analysis
and the provision of free advice and information.
Article 8 offers general protection for a
person’s private and family life, home and
correspondence from arbitrary interference
by the State.
 This right affects a large number of areas of
life ranging from surveillance to sexual
identity - it is framed extremely broadly.
 Respect for private life includes a right to
develop one’s own personality, as well as to
create relationships with others.
 Article 8 has been critical in providing basic
protection for the rights of homosexual and
transsexual people.

 Privacy
however, is not absolute
 This
is because proportionate and lawful
intrusion is necessary for things like child
protection, tax collection and public safety.
 The
government reserve the right to invade
your privacy for a number of reasons.
 Most
importantly IF you doing something
illegal in your private life the HR act does
not protect you.
The problem is that as technology advances it
becomes easier and easier to keep tabs on
people.
 In a bid to reduce crime the government has
allowed the expansion of CCTV networks,
databases and other technologies.
 BUT, Privacy is a fundamental human right. It
allows us the opportunity to express ourselves
and exercise our important freedoms
 The more these technologies develop the more
they will impact on our human rights.
 How far should we allow them to go for safety?


In response to this issue Liberty issued a recent report in
which Gareth Grossman writes:
A society which does not pay sufficient regard to personal
privacy is one where dignity, intimacy, and trust are fatally
undermined.
What is family life without a little bit of personal space
around the home?
How do you protect people from degrading treatment
(whether in hospital, prison or the home) without paying
regard to their privacy?
How are fair trials possible without confidential legal advice
or free elections without secret ballots? Equally, whilst free
speech, law enforcement and public health are often seen
in tension with personal privacy, think of anonymous
sources, vulnerable witnesses and terrified patients who
may be more likely to seek help if their confidences are
safe and perceived to be so.
 The
report explores three
different kinds of
surveillance:
 Targeted
 mass
 visual

State sanctioned surveillance against
specific targets was created under the
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
 The
report concludes that although the basic
structure is sound it lacks accountability and
transparency.
 In
particular, there is a need for judicial
authorisation for the most intrusive forms of
surveillance and an improved complaints
mechanism.
 The
report concludes that surveillance
takes place on a massive scale that nearly
440,000 authorizations for
communications traffic data took place
between June 2005 and March 2006.
 Communications
traffic is data, such as
phone taps, email checking, mobile phone
location and call records.
 Is
this too many? Liberty want a judge
to authorise these like warrants.

Mass surveillance has come about through the huge
‘growth and impact of mass databases’

It is becoming easier to trace and track huge
numbers of people, searching for evidence of illegal
activity among huge innocent populations.

CCTV cameras with facial recognition software and
number-plate reading software can store movements
of civilian population so that simple searches can
produce detailed monitoring of ordinary members of
the public.

Is it acceptable that such data on our movements is
stored and accessible by government agencies as a
matter of routine?
 Visual
surveillance is the ‘daily exposure to
mass CCTV surveillance’.
 In
the UK there are 4.2 million cameras in
operation.
 We
are the most observed nation in the
WHOLE WORLD
 CCTV
can be used for crime detection but its
effectiveness in crime prevention is
unknown.

Our data is found on all sorts of databases





Doctors surgeries
Schools
Hospitals
Tax authorities
banks and credit card companies

loyalty-card schemes exist to gather enormous amounts of
data on buyers and work out what sorts of things they
should sell

This data reveals valuable information about us which may
be used to
help teachers plan our next lessons
 help doctors understand our medical history and better treat
us, and give the government some idea who is paying their
taxes and who is not.


On the internet some websites place
‘cookies’ on our hard drive which monitor
where we go after that site.

They store information about us so when we
return, that data is transferred back to the
website that dropped the cookie.

It can help retailers to learn about their
customers so they can market their products
more effectively and produce new products
that will appeal to their shoppers. That
information is valuable.
If you are
innocent,
you have
nothing to
hide.

Some argue that their should be a national
database.

a complete record of our DNA would enable
police and other public authorities to conduct
searches of the data, perhaps finding and
convicting criminals who are currently free to
commit crimes against members of the public.

Currently the UK database has an estimated 3.9
million samples.

It is the largest of its kind in the world because
under the current law, DNA can be taken and
retained following arrest for any recordable
offence.

There is a disproportionate racial representation
on the database.

nearly 40% of black men are on it, 13% of Asian
men and 9% of white men.

DNA is useful for sexual assault or other violent
crimes, but should innocent members of the
public have their DNA on the database just in
case they might commit a crime in future?

One official has argued it might be useful if
disobedient primary school children were
required to give their DNA as they are more
likely to commit violent crimes in future so could
be caught more easily. (Grossman)
Thinking point!
 With
the increasing amount of data stored in
databases online, people buying over the
internet and banking on the internet, there
are serious ethical concerns about growing
cyber crime.
 This
included selling your banking
information, using spyware (software on your
computer which monitors your activity and
sends information such as passwords to
another computer) and indentify theft.
 With
identity theft, your personal details are
stolen, via the internet, from your computer
or from websites and emails.
 Other
sorts of crime are also prevalent on
the internet including child pornography and
hate websites which target racial or religious
groups and advocate or encourage violence
towards those groups.
 The
internet is dependent on internet service
providers connecting you to the world wide
web and also an architecture of computer
servers around the world.
advantages
 If
a person is innocent then they should
have nothing to hide.
 As
long as you do nothing wrong then this
database will not affect your life.
 What
have you got to hide?
 The
increased likelihood of being caught
plays on the mind of the potential criminal.
 As
a result they are less likely to commit the
crime because they feel they are more likely
to be caught.
 The
surveillance acts as to deter the criminal
from committing the crime in the first place.

Having more information on the database will
mean that the police will be able to catch
criminals more easily.

They will have all peoples DNA and then will
be able to match that up with the person
when they catch them.

This is clear in number-plate recognition
technology where cars are scanned on the
road and they can be checked if they are
stolen or if it should have been scrapped.
 the
more information an organisation has
about you, the better they can deal with
you.
A
doctors surgery will be able to gather your
medical details and the medical details of
your family and suggest treatments or
possible hereditary diseases that need to be
addressed.
A
company such as Tesco’s can pass you
specific information which refers to your
buying habits and help you get the products
you want faster.
disadvantages

Article 8 says that a person’s private and family
life should be free from interference by the State.

This is a fine line and we should be aware of the
pressure that the state will want to put on us.

How much information is too much interference?





Where you live?
What you buy?
What your read?
When you go to work?
What your DNA is?
 Deterrents
do not work.
 People
still commit violent crime in countries
where the death penalty exists.
 Despite
the security cameras people still
commit crime in city centres at night.
 The
solution is to solve the problems and
motivations of crime not deter people
because of punishment.
 It
simply does not work.

The problem with the national database is
the problem of misuse.

If we are concerned with the problem of
cyber crime then surely we should be worried
about the problem of storing the data of 60
million people in one central location.

In addition, these databases are maintained
and inputted by HUMANS. They are subject
to error and there is no guarantee that data
will not be incorrectly inputted and as a
result no guarantee about people being free
from false convictions
 Why
does Tesco need that much information?
 Their
motivations are profit based and not
for the good of the community.
 Profit
is not a good basis for society. It is
materialistic and not centred on the good for
the individual.
 Does
doctors databases create a
hypochondriac culture where everybody is
scared of what is happening?
What do
you think?
 New
technologies have many benefits for
people, health, crime and the new
society.
 However, they do pose a threat to the
security of a persons Human Rights.
 We have to be vigilant in order to
maintain a society where the individual is
treated as such, their freedoms and
liberties protected and they are not
treated as a second class citizen.

“If you are innocent you have nothing to
hide.” Discuss (20 marks)

To what extend should we be free to go about
our affairs without surrveillance?


Give your own view and support it with recent
evidence
How much is your privacy worth? Is it better
to give up our DNA to a central database so
that more criminals are caught?

Give your own view and support it with recent
evidence
1.
Recently a head teacher from a primary
school contacted parents to inform them
about the new fingerprint-based library
system that the school wanted to
introduce. The system scans students’
fingerprints when they take out or return
books. The school allowed parents to opt
their children out of the scheme (the
children would get a card instead), but how
will those children feel if all their friends
go for the fingerprint scanner option
instead? Is it unduly technophobic and old
fashioned to be concerned, or is there
something worrying going on here?
You should EVALUATE
the main points of view.
 If
you are innocent
then you have
nothing to hide.
 Discuss
 20
marks
 Use
the reading
pack to help you.
Give four arguments –
two for and two
against.
Make sure you explain
each point fully,
developing it with
evidence and linking the
paragraphs together to
fully evaluate the point.
Include a person
conclusion.
1.
Article 8
2.
Liberty and the 2000
report on
surveillance

Should have nothing to
hide

Acts as a deterrent
Targeted surveillance
and communications
data

Catches more
criminals

Availability of goods
3.
4.
5.
6.
Mass surveillance and
databases
Visual surveillance
and the big brother
state
Cyber crime
Advantages
Disadvantages

Article 8

Deterrents don’t work

Abuse of the system

Availability of goods
Try to use contemporary examples where you
can. Examiners will be impressed by current
knowledge.
 Read broadsheet newspapers or look on their
online indexes for articles about embryo
technology, the testing of new drugs, cloning
and new surveillance technologies.
 These are always areas of interest.
 Not only will you have current information
but these articles are also good sources of
pithy quotations and arguments both ‘for’
and ‘against’.

1.
2.
To know and understand the relationship
between Science and Religion.
To consider the role religion could play in
control of science
KEY WORDS
KEY
PHILOSOPHERS
Regulator
Ends in
themselves
Einstein
Appleyard
Dyson

Quotes about religion and
science


Science and religion have been
great partners


They have also been great
opponents

Technological advancements
have benefited religious
organisations

But the worry over ethics is
still there.

Religion champions
individualism and the sanctity
of life. As long as this is not
opposed the two can be
friends.




Religion has always had a
regulatory history.
Current research is governed
by ethical controls and
government bodies which is
responsible to the public.
Religion does not want to stop
technological advancement but
does have moral concerns.
Religious control however, has
been shown to have negative
effects on scientific
advancement in Iran
Governments are accountable
to the public, whereas religions
are not.
As such, governments should
be in control with religions
offering their view.
A legitimate conflict
between science and
religion cannot exist.
Science without religion is
lame, religion without
science is blind.
It is...idle to pretend, as many do,
that there is no contradiction
between religion and science.
Science contradicts religion as
surely as Judaism contradicts Islam –
they are absolutely and irresolvably
conflicting views. Unless, that is,
science is obliged to change its
fundamental nature.
“Science and religion are two windows
that people look through, trying to
understand the big universe outside,
trying to understand why we are here.
The two windows five different views,
but both look out at the same
universe. Both views are one-sided,
neither is complete. Both leave out
essential features of the real world.
And both are worthy of respect.”
Science can purify religion from
error and superstition; religion
can purify science from idolatry
and false absolutes. Each can
draw the other into a wider
world, a world in which both can
flourish...we need each other to
be what we must be, what we are
called to be.
When religion was strong
and science weak, men
mistook magic for
medicine; now, when
science is strong and
religion weak, men mistake
medicine for magic.
 Religion
and science have a troubled
history. Richard Blackwell writes that
throughout its long history Christianity
has been involved in a love-hate
relationship with science.
 On
the one hand there have been
times when Christianity has engaged
science with great warmth and
benefit:
 For
example the synthesis between
Aristotle’ science and Aquinas’
Christian theology
 Science
has also benefited from some
religious sources.
 Blackwell
notes that in the 17th century the
religious conviction that the universe is
fundamentally RATIONAL and can be
understood through thought and reason gave
modern science its initial self confidence
that there was a scientific explanation for
things.
 People
God.
were trying to understand the mind of
 At
other times science and religion have
opposed each other and well-known
examples are:
1. Galileo’s spent his life under house arrest
after claiming that the planets orbited the
sun.
2. Copernicus and Keppler suffered similar
fates.
3. Darwin – was challenged by the Church and
denounced as a heretic. The date over
evolution continues to this day.

Other religions have also had difficulties with
science and technology.

Medieval Islam was scientifically more
advanced than in the west, but in more
recent centuries there has been little
interest in scientific developments in some
Muslim countries with little money going into
scientific research, quite unlike the early
history.

The ideology that the golden age of Islam has
passed means that many believe a reversal in
society is needed rather than progression.

The problem seems to be competing sources of
authority.

Religion has seemed nervous of scientific
discoveries which seem to undermine religious
beliefs.

At the same time many great scientists held, and
still hold, religious beliefs.

Not all scientists seek to try to answer religious
questions and not all religions try to answer
scientific questions, though distinguishing the
two might sometimes be difficult.

As well as science religion has depended on
technological developments and been changed by
them. The inventions of writing marked a
fundamental shift in religious teachings as sacred
texts could be written down rather than passed
through oral traditions.

The printing press mean that religious writings
become widely available.

Cathedrals and great mosques and temples represent
some of the finest achievements in architecture and
structural engineering – for instance st Pauls in
London or Sulimanye mosque in Istanbul.

In the modern world religions use the internet
extensively to propagate beliefs and link communities
together.

An important area of conflict in the present
age is concerned with medical ethics, and, in
particular, the use of human embryos.

Religions that belief that human life from
conception is sacred have great difficulty
accepting that embryos can be created for
experimentation or for the development of
medicines or support of other children.

This seems to be using on human person for
another.
It seems to break a Kantian rule that people
should never be treated as a means to an end
but always ends in themselves, and a
religious rule that human life is sacred with a
divine purpose or eternal destiny.
 Scientific breakthroughs may well be made
through the use of the human embryo in this
way, but religions that regard embryos as
having dignity and as being persons, even if
only potential persons at that stage, will
never be comfortable with it.

How far should society
allow religion to
control scientific and
technological
development?
Government by
the people, for
the people

Research take place within research
establishments which may be state-funded
(usually universities) or privately funded
bodies (a research and development part of
a company).

In the UK, government regulation controls
the deployment of new technologies so, for
instance, drug regulatory authorities
license new medicines for specific uses.

In the British parliamentary democracy new
technologies and scientific developments
are controlled ultimately by an elected
Parliament which can be voted out during
general elections.
C of E bishops are given
lordships and contribute to
legislation in the House of
Lords
Regulatory bodies such as, HFEA may have
representation from religious and other interest
communities to help guide decision making
 Even thought there is an established Church of
England, religions do not have ethical controls
over science and technology, parliament does.
 They are not free to do what they want however,
research establishments have ethical processes
for their research activities and companies may
also have such guidelines, but these are selfregulatory processes.

The problem with society and
advancement is that tensions emerge
where particular groups differ from the
perceived consensus.
 For instance, in the case of embryo
experimentation, some religious groups
object to the use of embryos for
experimentation.
 They do not necessarily want to stop
developments, but they do try to
influence the way developments take
place so that, for instance, the
individual dignity and sanctity of the
human person are taken into account.

Religions have
such a strong
moral grounding
that they wish to
prevent
violations
happening
especially if they
consider it a
downward slope
for society.
Their intention is
good but is it
outdated and
based on
unfounded
claims?

In other countries such as Iran, religious
authorities have direct powers to prevent or
allow development and practices.

the questions are:
1.
To what extent should religion have any
special position in influencing laws beyond
the usual democratic process?
2.
Does this represent an important tradition of
thought that should have a special voice of
authority on matters of public importance?

The same question can apply to any pressure
group seeking to change the law on an issue it
feels to be important.
However, Iran
currently has a
very dubious past
and present
regarding Human
Rights. Actions
have and are
justified by the
extremist Islamic
religious authority
which runs the
country.

Governments are aware of public opinion
(they cannot survive elections without public
support).

They listen to pressure groups and other
interest groups (including religious groups) to
form a view on what societies values are an
how they apply to particular issues.

They can also represent the public morality
better than the religion which may express
naive views about science and technology
which frustrate developments.

Religion has throughout our history taken a
regulatory role in science and technology.

However, how can we justify any religion taking
the moral high ground in a multiethnic and multifaith society?

Ultimately it seems that religion does offer an
important moral check for science.

But, it should only be taken into advisement,
whist the elected government should have the
final say.

The religious view is important but in order to
make equal advancement it sometimes must be
overruled.
1.
Is science heartless? Give four reasons
for your view.
2.
Is religion mindless? Give four reasons
for your view.
3.
Consider the quotations on the previous
slides. Choose one that you find
convincing and another that you do not
find so convincing and give reasons for
your choices.
 Check
the wording of the questions
carefully. There are bound to be
contentious words in there designed to
enable you to discuss quite passionately
(words like ‘control’ and ‘permit’ and
‘limit’. Practice answers where you
debate the meaning of these words as
well as the arguments for and against the
motion.

Quotes about religion and
science


Science and religion have been
great partners


They have also been great
opponents

Technological advancements
have benefited religious
organisations

But the worry over ethics is
still there.

Religion champions
individualism and the sanctity
of life. As long as this is not
opposed the two can be
friends.




Religion has always had a
regulatory history.
Current research is governed
by ethical controls and
government bodies which is
responsible to the public.
Religion does not want to stop
technological advancement but
does have moral concerns.
Religious control however, has
been shown to have negative
effects on scientific
advancement in Iran
Governments are accountable
to the public, whereas religions
are not.
As such, governments should
be in control with religions
offering their view.