Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Controversy of stem cell research
Stem cell research and ethical issues surrounding the topic
Ethics in the natural sciences
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Controversy of stem cell research
1. Ethical judgments limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences. Discuss.
Ethics is an interesting area of knowledge since they are very important to our human nature, yet they are not identical to everyone. According to moral relativism our values are determined by the society we grow up in, and there are no universal values (-). Therefore this implies that every culture has different ethical or moral values that are determined by their society. Art is no different, different cultures and people have different tastes in art. We can say that works of art are made with an intention or a meaning. Therefore depending on the culture the intention or meaning of a piece of art may differ. In some cases the meaning of a piece of art can be immoral to some people, this is evident in the political art “Kissing Doesn’t Kill: Greed and Indifference Do”. The natural sciences study the aspects of our reality that are tangible. This can be categorized into biology, chemistry, and physics. All of these natural sciences are different in its contributions to knowledge for example biology is the study of life, while chemistry is the study of the structure, properties, and changes in matter (-). Yet they are all connected and in many times put together to better understand the aspects of life. In the natural sciences ethics have limited the production of knowledge in many ways, one of them being the stem cell research in biology.
Biology helps us understand what we are and how we function. In my IB biology class we discussed the ethical implications in stem cell research. For many years the only two source of stem cells, or undifferentiated cells, came from the blastula of an embryo or the b...
... middle of paper ...
... of people with different sexual orientations but instead a problem of everyone. Thus the ethical values of our culture limited the production of knowledge in arts.
Our ethical codes are constructed as we start to understand the world we come from. From this we create a sense of what we consider to be right and wrong, yet this is different from person to person. People will most likely disagree to certain methods used to discover aspects of the human body in the natural sciences, but this doesn’t mean that knowledge should be disregarded. The same applies to the arts; knowledge is knowledge even if it goes against the ethical values of people. Moral relativism states that different cultures have different societies, thus if you don’t want your moral values to be discredited, then you shouldn’t discredit the moral values of others to further increase our knowledge.
Cultural Relativism is a moral theory which states that due to the vastly differing cultural norms held by people across the globe, morality cannot be judged objectively, and must instead be judged subjectively through the lense of an individuals own cultural norms. Because it is obvious that there are many different beliefs that are held by people around the world, cultural relativism can easily be seen as answer to the question of how to accurately and fairly judge the cultural morality of others, by not doing so at all. However Cultural Relativism is a lazy way to avoid the difficult task of evaluating one’s own values and weighing them against the values of other cultures. Many Cultural Relativist might abstain from making moral judgments about other cultures based on an assumed lack of understanding of other cultures, but I would argue that they do no favors to the cultures of others by assuming them to be so firmly ‘other’ that they would be unable to comprehend their moral decisions. Cultural Relativism as a moral theory fails to allow for critical thoughts on the nature of morality and encourages the stagnation
Embryonic stem cells research has challenged the moral ethics within human beings simply because the point at which one is considered a “human,” is still under debate and practically incapable to make a decision upon.
" An Overview of Stem Cell Research | The Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity."
...ns of a morally questionable nature. It is necessary that our practices remain ethical and that we uphold the value of a human life, as this is the cornerstone of human society. Embryonic stem cell research is one such operation that forces scientists, policy makers, and the larger society to define what constitutes a human life and to find an answer to the crucial question: Is it morally acceptable to violate the rights of a human life for the for the sake of medical progress?
Ethical judgements limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences. Discuss.
Ethical relativism is the belief that ethics are not universal and a sense of right from wrong derives from a society’s beliefs and customs. This belief states that there are no absolute morals that are completely right or wrong in every culture. Acts that seem questionable in our society, such as polygamy and incest, are viewed as acceptable in other cultures but are
Monroe, Kristen, et al., eds. Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical and Political Issues. Los Angeles/Berkley: University of California Press, 2008. Print
Waskey, Andrew J. “Moral Status of Embryo.” Encyclopedia of Stem Cell Research. Ed. Clive N. Svendsen, and Allison D. Ebert. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2008. 347-52. SAGE knowledge. Web. 15 Apr. 2013.
Embryonic stem cell research is, perhaps, one of the most divisive ethical issues of the millennium. These cells are thought by many to hold the cures for such diseases as diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, heart disease and even cancer. Some researchers believe that these cells could heal spinal cord injuries, allowing a once paralyzed man to walk again. Despite the numerous potential benefits, the issue is exceedingly controversial and has sparked much debate, primarily over one sole reason: embryonic stem cell research causes the destruction of an embryo. This debate can be epitomized into two questions: when does human life begin and what makes an organism human. The answers to these questions are usually opinionated and not backed
As noted in the discussion boards many times this semester when the discussions turn towards judgments of values for another culture, or sometimes just controversial topics, a quick response is that we cannot judge another act or culture as right or wrong without being in their shoes so-to-speak. One could argue this to be another contradiction though as in order to make the statement judging one for not following moral relativism, you would by default have to impose the judgment of moral relativism on that person. Before I begin to appear to pile on to the negatives of moral relativism, I must admit that I believe the vast majority of the time the intentions are pure. There is nothing wrong with being tolerant of those with different beliefs than you to a certain extent.
Production of knowledge is generally seen in a positive light. However, when ethics and morality become involved in the process of production, judgements will undoubtedly be made that may seem to limit the availability of that knowledge. Ethical judgements are made by the combination of a knower, his or her standard of value, and the situation itself. In the field of the arts and natural sciences, ethics plays a crucial role in the extent one may possibly be allowed to go to when discovering new knowledge. Reason and emotion are important ways of knowing that help guide knowers in making certain moral decisions. Both ways of knowing can be associated with teleological or deontological arguments; the ethics are based on either an objectives-focused or obligations-focused mindset. In this essay, I will be discussing the limitations set on both the arts and the natural sciences as areas of knowledge. To what extent do ethical implications hinder the way art can be produced or the methods involved in expanding society’s knowledge of science?
For Cultural Relativism, it is perfectly normal that something one culture sees as moral, another may see as immoral. There is no connection between them so they are never in conflict relative to their moral beliefs. However, within the context of Ethical Relativism there’s a significant difference. Normally, two cultures will possess varying proportions of the same normal and abnormal habits yet from a cross-cultural standpoint, what is abnormal in one culture can be seen as properly normal in an...
Ethics is the study of moral values and the principles we use to evaluate actions. Ethical concerns can sometimes stand as a barrier to the development of the arts and the natural sciences. They hinder the process of scientific research and the production of art, preventing us from arriving at knowledge. This raises the knowledge issues of: To what extent do moral values confine the production of knowledge in the arts, and to what extent are the ways of achieving scientific development limited due to ethical concerns? The two main ways of knowing used to produce ethical judgements are reason, the power of the mind to form judgements logically , and emotion, our instinctive feelings . I will explore their applications in various ethical controversies in science and arts as well as the implications of morals in these two areas of knowledge.
Cultural relativism states that moral standards, that are correct, correspond to cultures or societies. It is said “an act is morally acceptable just because it is allowed by the guiding ideals of the society” (Landau, p. 293). In a simpler way to put it, a person’s beliefs and activities should be understood by others in relation to that people’s own culture. There can be no unbiased standard to apply to all cultures, no one can say if someone is right or wrong. For example, it is socially acceptable for y younger teenagers to drink in other countries, but in America it is considered a major crime if you are underage and caught with alcohol.
Art is limited in a very large number of ways by the ethical judgements we make, but it is also often brought into existence as a result of our morals and emotions. These judgements seem to handicap the production of knowledge of and through art, but they are also vital to it. This is a sign that abandoning our morals would be difficult, but impractical for the arts. For science, however, abandoning these morals to avoid the obstacle of ethical judgements would allow us to understand much more than we do today, and even more than we did hundreds of years ago; however, these judgements also keep our developments in check. They may prevent some good, but they definitely prevent irreversible harm as well. It is clear that ethics has many drawbacks, but it is a necessary element of our lives.