Given the recent technological advancement, the debate surrounding biotechnology and cloning constitutes an ethical discussion and moral consideration. Biotechnology and cloning raise profound questions about the ethical treatment of life, autonomy, and the potential consequences of scientific innovation (Shafique 5). While we grapple with this ethical implication, one normative ethics system, deontology, emerges as a critical lens for scrutinizing the ethical dimensions of these technologies. As Sivakami emphasizes, Immanuel Kant’s deontological framework points to the inherent moral value of actions, emphasizing duties, universal principles, and the imperative to treat individuals as ends in themselves rather than a means to an end (4). Understanding the ethical complexities necessitates exploring the detailed understanding of the biotechnological cloning implications and the foundational views of deontological ethics. This essay will provide a thoughtful experience of the debate surrounding Biotechnology and cloning and illuminate how deontology, emphasizing moral duties and acceptability, evaluates the ethical dimensions of these advancements. The essay will also provide an objection to this deontological argument and respond to how this normative ethical system fails to challenge the debate on cloning.
The ongoing debate on biotechnology and cloning
The dispute surrounding biotechnology and cloning is a complex subject that encompasses ethical, moral, and scientific considerations. Loue and Sana, as proponents of cloning, argue that these technologies hold immense potential for medical advancements, offering solutions to genetic disorders and organ shortages (9). Cloning could pave the way for therapeutic applications, allowing the creation of tissues or organs for transplantation. However, critics express profound concerns about the ethical implications, questioning the sanctity of life and the potential misuse of such powerful tools (Hasim et al. 10). Issues related to consent, identity, and the unknown long-term consequences anchor the opponent’s stance. From a scientific standpoint, cloning involves replicating an organism’s genetic material to create an identical copy. In human cloning, discussions often center on the potential to clone organs for transplant, address fertility issues, or even replicate individuals (Hasim et al. 10). Striking a balance between scientific progress and ethical boundaries remains a formidable challenge as society grapples with the profound implications of biotechnological and cloning advancements. The subjects of bioethics and cloning are dynamic, continually evolving with scientific advances, and necessitates a deep exploration of both the potential benefits and ethical challenges posed by cloning technologies.
Deontology
As a normative ethics system, deontology provides a framework that assesses the morality of bioethics and cloning. Deontology is an ethical theory associated with Immanuel Kant that emphasizes the inherent moral value of actions rather than their consequences (Kranak 2). According to Kant, individuals are morally obligated to adhere to a set of universal principles derived from reason and the concept of categorical imperatives. These necessities are unconditional commands that apply to all rational beings, demanding actions based on principles that could be consistently willed as a universal law. In Kant’s “Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals,” he argues that moral duties are derived from the nature of rationality itself, asserting that individuals must act in ways that respect the autonomy and dignity of others (Ajvazi 5). Deontology’s central tenets include treating individuals as ends in themselves and prohibiting treating them merely as a means to an end. This framework rejects consequentialist approaches prioritizing outcomes, asserting that moral actions must align with duty and universal ethical principles (Kranak 4). As further illustrated by Ajvazi, Kantian deontology also details the importance of moral consistency and the concept of duty without exception, irrespective of potential positive or negative consequences (7). For instance, cloning a human being without proper consent might be considered ethically impermissible, as it violates the principle of treating individuals with the respect and autonomy they inherently possess
How deontology challenges biotechnology and cloning
Deontology evaluates the ethical aspects of biotechnology and cloning based on human dignity and autonomy principles. Cloning, mainly if carried out without the explicit and informed consent of the cloned individual, may be seen as a violation of the moral duty to respect the agency and self-determination of each person (ADIDI et al. 237). For instance, creating clones solely for organ harvesting is a violation of the principle of treating each individual as an end in themselves rather than a means to an end. Deontological ethics may argue that specific actions, such as creating clones without informed consent or manipulating their genetic makeup without proper justification, violate fundamental moral rules (ADIDI et al. 240). For example, cloning a human being could be deemed unethical under deontology if it violates the principle of treating each person as an end in themselves rather than a means to achieve specific medical or scientific goals. Concerns about consent and the potential commodification of human life are central to a deontological critique. Therefore, deontology leans on respecting certain moral principles regardless of the possible positive outcomes and challenging means employed in biotechnological advancements.
Another deontological concern is the creation of life for instrumental purposes, such as organ harvesting. From a deontological standpoint, this practice raises severe moral qualms as it treats individuals as mere means to an end rather than ends in themselves (Sivakami 6). Imposing existence on cloned individuals solely to meet the organ needs of others is deemed ethically problematic, challenging the core deontological principle that individuals possess inherent worth beyond their utility. Deontology argues that creating clones solely to extract organs may be viewed as inherently unethical, as it fails to recognize the intrinsic value of each individual and reduces them to a means to fulfill the needs of others (ADIDI et al. 240). Moreover, deontology prompts reflection on the potential long-term consequences and societal implications of cloning. According to Sivakami, deontological ethics encourages a thorough examination of whether cloning practices align with principles that safeguard the intrinsic value of individuals and uphold moral duties, fostering an in-depth understanding of the complex ethical landscape surrounding bioethical issues like cloning (6). This is because cloning might harm social structures, familial relationships, and the broader moral fabric of society.
Objection to the deontological argument
An objection to the deontological stance on biotechnology and cloning could arise from the perceived rigidity of Kantian principles and their application to complex moral dilemmas. Nugmanovna and Kamariddinzoda argue that deontology may need help to provide practical guidance in situations where moral duties seemingly conflict or when facing unprecedented ethical challenges in rapidly advancing fields like biotechnology (12). For instance, the objection may contend that strict adherence to deontological principles could hinder scientific progress by imposing categorical imperatives that do not account for the detailed ethical considerations inherent in biotechnological advancements. Further, considering the overall positive outcomes, a more flexible and consequentialist approach could better address the complexities of cloning and biotechnology without sacrificing ethical integrity (Nugmanovna and Kamariddinzoda 12). In response to this objection, it is essential to recognize that while emphasizing universal principles, deontology allows for a degree of flexibility through the application of maxims and the consideration of context. Ametller emphasizes that when properly understood, Kantian ethics does not advocate for blind adherence to rules. Still, it encourages individuals to act in ways that respect the autonomy and dignity of others (4). Additionally, the objection overlooks the potential for developing deontological principles specific to emerging technologies, adapting the ethical framework to address novel cloning challenges. By incorporating maxims that respect the fundamental principles of deontology while acknowledging the complexities of biotechnology, a more balanced approach can be achieved, ensuring ethical considerations align with both duty and the evolving landscape of scientific innovation such as cloning.
Conclusion
Examination of biotechnology and cloning through the lens of deontology has illuminated the ethical complexities inherent in scientific progress. Immanuel Kant’s emphasis on moral duties and universal principles provided a principled framework for evaluating the implications of these technologies. While the debate persists, the application of deontology highlights the importance of moral consistency and the intrinsic value of human life. Addressing objections raised against a deontological stance, it is essential to recognize the flexibility within this ethical framework, accommodating maxims that adapt to emerging challenges. As society grapples with the profound implications of biotechnological advancements, the ethical considerations explored in this analysis contribute to a broader understanding of the complex relationship between science, morality, and the evolving landscape of technological innovation.
Work Cited
ADIDI, Dokpesi Timothy, and Benson Peter IRABOR. “A DISCOURSE ON IMMANUEL KANT’S CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE AND ITS IMPLICATION ON HUMAN CLONING.” Journal of African Studies and Sustainable Development 2022.
Ajvazi, Irfan. “Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.” Available at SSRN 4102449 2022.
Ametller, Jaume. “Challenging existing norms and practices: Ethical thinking at the science education research boundaries.” Examining Ethics in Contemporary Science Education Research: Being Responsive and Responsible 2020: 107–119.
Hasim, Nur Asmadayana, et al. “The integration and harmonization of secular and Islamic ethical principles in formulating acceptable ethical guidelines for modern biotechnology in Malaysia.” Science and Engineering Ethics 26 2020: 1797-1825.
Kranak, Joseph. “Kantian deontology.” Introduction to philosophy: Ethics 2019.
Loue, Sana, and Sana Loue. “The New Frontier: Cloning.” Case Studies in Society, Religion, and Bioethics (2020): 229-252.
Nugmanovna, Makhmudova Aziza, and Kamariddinzoda Aminabonu Kamariddinovna. “Modern biotechnical problems of medicine and their solutions.” Archive of Conferences. Vol. 13. No. 1. 2021.
Shafique, Sidra. “Scientific and ethical implications of human and animal cloning.” International Journal of Science, Technology and Society 8.1 2020: 9–17.
Sivakami, Aruna. “Animal rights and animal cloning.” Philosophy and practice of bioethics across and between cultures 2019: 90–101.
write