The Impact of Ethical Decisions on the Discovery of Knowledge in the Natural Science and Art

“Science cannot stop while ethics catches up… and nobody should expect scientists to do all the thinking for the country” Elvin Charles Stakman (http://www.cesim.fr). The quote illustrates how science and ethics are interconnected but ethics is hindering what science can achieve. The knowledge issue I will be addressing is what impact do ethical decisions have on limiting the discovery of knowledge in the natural sciences and arts?

One day in biology class we were discussing the potential benefits of the harvesting of embryotic stem cells and how these cells could potentially help save lives, however one of the issues to the stem cell argument was, if stem cell research was to be conducted then scientists would be considered unethical because those embryos could potentially become a human being. I thought how could that be unethical? The embryo has not begun to develop in terms of developing a brain, heart and the other necessary organs necessary to live. Embryotic stem cells are potential life savers and certain people’s personal ethical boundaries determine whether future generations have access to important scientific discoveries that can alter medicine and science in the future. “I am opposed to both cloning and the destruction of human embryos and adamantly opposed to funding of embryonic stem cell research” (Sandy Adams http://www.brainyquote.com). The major opponents to stem cell research are primarily people with a strong affinity towards religious beliefs; many believe that life begins at conception. However the zygote does not have the ability to survive if it was to be taken out and fend for itself given that it did not develop necessary organs. Therefore the argument that life starts at conception is incorrect given ...

... middle of paper ...

...en influenced by their religious outlooks. There are specific lines that some pieces of art cross (similar to science) and therefore lead to impressions that art is unethical because of one’s backdrop of ethics and that backdrop my influence how one makes rational decisions about art.

The issue of ethics in the arts and natural sciences makes it difficult to determine whether something is art or even the morality of human testing. This issue will continue to be basis for ongoing debates and differing opinions. The ethical boundaries that are set (in science) do they hinder what can be determined knowledge? In addition when these lines prevent important discoveries from being made, can the ethical implications be detrimental to society? When they hinder important discoveries in science one could perceive them as being roadblock to the continued evolution of mankind.