Are you in favor of setting ethical limits to scientific studies?!
Question: such as human-animal hybrid embryos or human cloning?
Answers: such as human-animal hybrid embryos or human cloning?
I think those would be cool experiments! But, alas, being ethical should rule! But whose ethics should we employ? Yours? Mine? Society doesn't know ethical boundaries! We're trapped like rats!
That is a dangerous thing. Messing with nature like that. I am in favor of setting ethical limits.
There are already TONS of ethical laws and limits set and continually being set for scientific studies. Experiments that have been conducted in the past 50, even 20 years are often now considered entirely unethical.
Human-animal hybrid embryos and human cloning would most certainly fall into that category.
yes, I am. I believe that just because we CAN do something, it doesn't necessarily mean we SHOULD.
The hair-splitter here is who's ethics? There are no "universal" ethics, so it's going to be subjective, regardless of the proposal. I have no knowledge of human-animal hybrids being proposed inside of the scientific community, especially since it's common knowledge that inter-species correlations run into problems with DNA matching, and cloning isn't anything more than a notion that has gone to the bottom of the list, so to speak, since more important issues have surfaced. If you would gladly give your life for a family member, why not accept that volunteers can be used for the betterment of the human race?
Yes, the part I can't figure out is who should be setting the limits. We the people don't know enough to base a decision on anything other than our prejudices. Our politicians aren't much better. Our courts are often more bound by law than sense. Getting a bunch of scientists to decide almost makes sense, but since they are on the "let's see what science can do side" and not the "be careful we don't let science get out of hand" side, they aren't the best choice.
People have spoken of the need to figure out the ethics of some of the science that was on the sci-fi fringe but could become reality in a few decades. So much can be done that could be wonderful or horrible, and really there is no watchdog other than the scientist's own conscious. Does anyone have a good answer?
Let me answer by asking this question?
Do you think testing a new medical procedure by a physician on him/herself is ethical?
Is experimenting death or suicide personally or collectively is ethical? (just to find out what is happening)
the only thing I can say is that any research of any kind should be open to opinions of others, there is no means of finding out what is ethical and what is not, so it is the responsibility of the researcher to reach for the others opinions and not to hide the procedure and aims of the study, which by doing so we are limiting the possibility of disaster to a great deal. Speed might be limited but the achievements are more reliable.