Secular ResponsesSecular Responses

Use of the EmbryoUse of the Embryo

UtilitarianismUtilitarianismBased on the idea of the greatest happiness for the greatest number Based on the idea of the greatest happiness for the greatest number or majorityor majorityAlso based on hedonismAlso based on hedonismConcerned with maximising pleasure and minimising pain for the Concerned with maximising pleasure and minimising pain for the individual as well as the majorityindividual as well as the majorityOften requires a ‘sacrifice’ of one’s (minorities) own happiness for Often requires a ‘sacrifice’ of one’s (minorities) own happiness for the sake of the majoritythe sake of the majorityFor Utilitarians there are no objective moral facts, things are only For Utilitarians there are no objective moral facts, things are only right or wrong depending on the results that they produceright or wrong depending on the results that they produceThe equity principle is the notion that everyone is considered equal, The equity principle is the notion that everyone is considered equal, no one person’s happiness is more important than that of any no one person’s happiness is more important than that of any other’s happinessother’s happinessConcerned primarily with the consequences and the best outcome Concerned primarily with the consequences and the best outcome for the majorityfor the majority

Utilitarianism and EmbryosUtilitarianism and Embryos

With regard to the use of embryos the Utilitarian would take into With regard to the use of embryos the Utilitarian would take into consideration the state of the embryoconsideration the state of the embryo

Is the embryo a person?Is the embryo a person?

Utilitarian definition of a person would include consciousness, ability Utilitarian definition of a person would include consciousness, ability to feel pain/pleasure, self awareness and the ability to express to feel pain/pleasure, self awareness and the ability to express themselvesthemselves

Since the embryo lacks all of the these qualities the embryo is not a Since the embryo lacks all of the these qualities the embryo is not a person in the sense that we understand it person in the sense that we understand it

The greater good for the majority therefore justifies the destruction The greater good for the majority therefore justifies the destruction of the embryoof the embryo

Destruction of the embryo is not morally relevant to Utilitarians as it Destruction of the embryo is not morally relevant to Utilitarians as it feels no pain and has no self interest or consciousnessfeels no pain and has no self interest or consciousness

Peter SingerPeter Singer

Australian UtilitarianAustralian UtilitarianVery outspoken on quality of life of severely handicapped Very outspoken on quality of life of severely handicapped babies and the terminally illbabies and the terminally illBelieves that they should be allowed/left to die when Believes that they should be allowed/left to die when their quality of life is so poor as to negate life itselftheir quality of life is so poor as to negate life itselfSee page 92 of text book for part of Singer’s argumentSee page 92 of text book for part of Singer’s argumentSinger would consider the suffering of the majority to be Singer would consider the suffering of the majority to be the primary concern: the end does justify the meansthe primary concern: the end does justify the meansThe embryo is not a sentient being The embryo is not a sentient being If destruction of the embryo brings cures for numerous If destruction of the embryo brings cures for numerous diseases that will invariably end suffering then the diseases that will invariably end suffering then the embryo is a means to an endembryo is a means to an end

Deontological ApproachDeontological Approach

Kantian EthicsKantian Ethics

Based on duty and reasonBased on duty and reason

No rational thinking being would will/wish that they had been No rational thinking being would will/wish that they had been experimented on as an embryoexperimented on as an embryo

If you will it for others you must also will it for yourselfIf you will it for others you must also will it for yourself

Application of the Categorical Imperative- 3 formulationsApplication of the Categorical Imperative- 3 formulations

1.1. The universal law: what ever you will must be applicable to The universal law: what ever you will must be applicable to everyone in the same or similar situationeveryone in the same or similar situation

2.2. Means to an end- no one must ever be used simply as a means Means to an end- no one must ever be used simply as a means to an end bit must be ends in themselvesto an end bit must be ends in themselves

3.3. The kingdom of ends- we are all lawmaking members of the The kingdom of ends- we are all lawmaking members of the kingdom of endskingdom of ends

KantKant

Kant believed that human beings were the high point of Kant believed that human beings were the high point of God’s creationGod’s creation

This was because of their unique ability to reasonThis was because of their unique ability to reason

Firstly we all have a duty to protect the innocent as we Firstly we all have a duty to protect the innocent as we were all innocent (children) at one time and needed were all innocent (children) at one time and needed protection (self preservation)protection (self preservation)

The embryo cannot defend itself so it requires protectionThe embryo cannot defend itself so it requires protection

However, the embryo cannot reason, so the question to However, the embryo cannot reason, so the question to be asked is: Does a Kantian consider the embryo to be a be asked is: Does a Kantian consider the embryo to be a human person?human person?

The Categorical ImperativeThe Categorical Imperative

If we apply the categorical imperative to the use of embryos in research If we apply the categorical imperative to the use of embryos in research we have to ask if this could become a universal law, without we have to ask if this could become a universal law, without becoming a contradiction. Embryo research is only carried out on becoming a contradiction. Embryo research is only carried out on those embryos left over from IVF, they are never likely to become those embryos left over from IVF, they are never likely to become a person anyway. Could this be universalised, I think it could. Is it a person anyway. Could this be universalised, I think it could. Is it using the embryo as a means to an end? Yes it is and for using the embryo as a means to an end? Yes it is and for Kantians the consequences do not matter. Even if Parkinson’s Kantians the consequences do not matter. Even if Parkinson’s and other diseases were eradicated it would not justify the and other diseases were eradicated it would not justify the destruction of the embryo. We are all expected to be law making destruction of the embryo. We are all expected to be law making members of a society where everyone is treated as an end in members of a society where everyone is treated as an end in themselves because with the application of reason this is how we themselves because with the application of reason this is how we would want to live and be treated. But the problem for Kantian would want to live and be treated. But the problem for Kantian ethics is that the embryo lacks the ability to apply reason. See ethics is that the embryo lacks the ability to apply reason. See page 110page 110