Embryonic Research: A Battle of Fallacies

1435 Words6 Pages
Many women are eager to become a mother, but infertility prevents some women from satisfying this need. To counter this widespread problem, we develop reproductive choices. One of the most important choices is in vitro fertilization. Even though this method significantly increases pregnancy rate in infertile women, it comes with the problem. Underlying in vitro fertilization is research on living human embryos. We need to research on countless living embryos in order to develop clinical in vitro fertilization. This stirs public attention on its morality. Society asks: Are we killing thousands of human life while we are developing method to give birth to other ones? This question is crucial because it is asking very foundation of our morality. We need to find the answer which can be proved thoroughly relevant, or otherwise, we are undermining our moral standard itself. To resolve this ethical dilemma, we turn our expectation to bioethicists because we need reliable thought, concrete argument, and plausible solution, and they seem to be only kind of people we can rely on. With our expectation, we tend to trust them. But the reality is opposite. The arguments from bioethicists may not be reliable as promised. We have to be conscious and cautious when we are considering their arguments. After contemplating two essays from both sides of the argument, “The Meaning of Life –In Laboratory” by Leon Kass and “Progeny, Progress, and Primrose Paths” by Samuel Gorovitz, we see the dialogues arguing on this moral issue contain amount of weak arguments and even logical fallacies. We may focus first on the arguments against embryonic research. Among prominent opponents of embryonic research is Leon Kass, who wrote “The Meaning of Life –In Lab... ... middle of paper ... ... rely on them. As important as moral standard discussing in embryonic research issue is the logical standard. Logical fallacies might make the essay look more attractive, but after being scrutinized, the presence of logical fallacies degrades value of essay itself. It is not until the bioethicists give us the candid but concrete arguments on morality of embryonic research that we can trust them and take them into account while we are struggling to make this crucial decision, drafting our policy on this important and sensitive issue. Work Cited Samuel Gorovitz, “Progeny, Progress, and Primrose Paths,” The Ethics of Reproductive Technology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 117-127 Leon Kass, “The Meaning of Life–In the Laboratory,” The Ethics of Reproductive Technology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 98-116

More about Embryonic Research: A Battle of Fallacies

Open Document