If we conclude that there is some knowledge we should not pursue on ethical grounds, how can we determine the boundaries of acceptable investigation within an area of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
Dear questioner,
I must admit that you ask an intriguing and thought provoking question, but, before I continue, the question that you have asked is deeply ethical and philosophical and thus has no ‘right’ answer. However, I am willing to provide my own thoughts and feelings on this question.
Discerning the boundaries of acceptable investigation within an area of knowledge is a difficult endeavor, requiring careful consideration of potential ethical implications and consequences of pursuing an area of knowledge. Even then, human beings have proved time and time again that when we take action we cannot completely do so with knowledge of all potential ramifications. Take the Trinity Test- the test detonation of the first atomic bomb on the Alamogordo Bombing Range, which, despite the calculations of physicists at Los Alamos, caused a spike in Infant deaths and put any residency within 2,700 miles downwind of ground zero at risk of cancer and other life-threatening conditions (Little 2023).
Scientific research defines the boundaries of acceptable investigation through ethical guidelines and principles. Research including human subjects, for example, is expected to adhere to strict ethical regulations, such as respecting privacy, ensuring complete consent, and minimizing harm. Now, while these boundaries have been established through ethical review boards, codes of conduct, and legal regulations, one could ask why they are necessary—especially if abandoning the aforementioned conditions leads to the obtaining of information that could help a greater population than people harmed by forsaking them. For instance, we only know of the stages of hypothermia and frostbite through the heinous experimentations of Japanese Unit 731 on innocent Chinese civilians, experiments that lacked all of the aforementioned conditions and caused horrible deaths (HUMAN EXPERIMENTATIONS 2021). However, again, knowledge of hypothermia and frostbite has saved many human beings since then. This cannot be justified—I do not see this as an opinion, but as a fact—(coming from an American) nothing justifies the atrocities committed by Unit 731 and the Japanese Empire, no matter how it benefits us in the future. The experiments conducted by Unit 731 were pure evil and crossed all of the lines mentioned above.
However, it is important to mention that the determination of acceptable investigation is not always as clear-cut as the example given above. For instance, the modern debate of genetic engineering and human advancement, which involves manipulating the genetic material of living organisms to change traits and characteristics. Obviously, being born as a ‘designer baby’ would provide great opportunity for such a person, but it could also lead to situations where parents decide traits for their children in hopes of grooming a child for a particular profession (for example, giving a child extremely high intelligence, logic and problem-solving in hopes of allowing the child to excel in math and science to be an engineer or physicist). I believe that freedom is an inalienable right that all humans are entitled to, and, thus, removing or obstructing the freedom for children to choose their own lives before they are even born is crossing a line for me. Granted, you will see parents heavily influencing their children’s careers and lives regardless, but again, this is a line that I believe should not be crossed.
Another example of this is in the matter of human cloning, which seemingly becomes more and more relevant, as sheep, monkeys, and even dinosaurs have been successfully cloned (sort of) (Scientists Have 2022). Now, it seems likely that in the near future we will have the potential to clone humans. Why would we do this in the first place? Well, allow me to give an example. My father’s friend died about two years ago because his liver was severely damaged and he needed a liver transplant to recover. He died in the hospital waiting for an available liver, as, at the time they were in low supply and high demand. It has been speculated that we could, in theory, clone ourselves, and harvest organs from our clones in order to prolong our lives through guaranteed replacement organs. This could have saved my father’s friends, and it has the potential to save millions. However, it completely disregards all ethical guidelines mentioned in paragraph two, and, with this, and my own religious beliefs, I believe that cloning is immoral and its ethical violations outweigh its potential benefits.
I know that that was a lot to read, but I hope it answers your question, or at least informs you of what one of us at Dear Letterbox believes. Thank you for posting and we look forward to hearing more from you.
Dear Letterbox
Citations:
"HUMAN EXPERIMENTATIONS AT UNIT 731." Pacific Atrocities Education, 2021, www.pacificatrocities.org/
human-experimentation.html. Accessed 19 Nov. 2023.
Little, Becky. "The Atomic Bomb's First Victims Were in New Mexico." History, A&E Television
Networks, 27 July 2023, www.history.com/news/atomic-bomb-test-victims-new-mexico-downwinders.
Accessed 19 Nov. 2023.
"Scientists Have Just Successfully Recreated A Dinosaur From Chicken DNA!" The Archaeologist, 4
Dec. 2022, www.thearchaeologist.org/blog/
scientists-have-just-successfully-recreated-a-dinosaur-from-chicken-dna. Accessed 19 Nov. 2023.