Stem Cells vs

Stem Cells vs. Philosophical Theories

This page is going to explore the stem cell issues by approaching the issue through philosophical theories.

The stem cell issue is controversial from a moral, ethical, and political standpoint, so where how would different philosophical frameworks see the issue of stem cells?

Although I think that all of the frameworks are open to interpretation and some can side either way, this is my attempt to argue the issue by means of these frameworks.

ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY
From the wikipedia explanation, " The method of Analytic philosophy is a generalized approach to philosophy. Originally associated with the projects of logical analysis, it nowadays emphasizes a clear, precise approach with particular weight being placed upon argumentation and evidence, avoidance of ambiguity, and attention to detail. This has made many philosophical subjects more suited to specialization and precision work, and also made many writings more technical than they were in the past. Arguably it has also resulted in philosophy having less of the sweeping "meaning of life" scope that is popularly associated with the term, and the critics of analytic philosophy sometimes level this point against it. On the other hand, it has arguably added focus and rigor, allowing for debate and a reduction in philosophers talking past each other."
Analytic philosophy also has a tendency to ignore ethics in the pursuit of the inherent "right" answer.
Because of the above definitions, analytic philosophers would most likely see no objections to stem cell research. Since they often do not consider moral and ethical issues, to them, the issue would be perceived as a great advancement in medicine and scientific knowledge of human development.
The main argument against stem cell research is based on moral and ethical arguments, therefore, analytic philosophers would be in favor of the research.
To read more, go here!

STOICISM
Stoicism is the idea that people can transcend both pain and pleasure, and freedom results from this transcendence.
From Wikipedia, Stoicism is described as "a school of philosophy founded (308 BCE) in Athens by Zeno of Citium (Cyprus). It teaches self-control and detachment from distracting emotions, sometimes interpreted as an indifference to pleasure or pain. This allows one to be a clear thinker, levelheaded and unbiased. In practice, Stoicism is intended to imbue an individual with virtue, wisdom, and integrity of character. Students are encouraged to help those in need, knowing that those who can, should. Stoicism also teaches psychological independence from society, regarding it as an unruly and often unreasonable entity."
Considering the explanations above, I think that Stoic thought could go either way on the issue of stem cell research.
In one way, I think that they would see stem cells as a relief to pain and suffering, BUT because stoics believe that wisdom, virtue and integrity, could be found by transcending this pain, they may not be in favor of stem cell research. They may rather be in favor of nature taking its course, and instead of the person in pain looking for relief, that person will learn to rise above the pain.
Looking at it from another way, I think that some stoics would be in favor of stem cell research. Because students are encouraged to help those in need, stem cells would be a great advancement to help those who are in pain and suffering.
For more information, click here!

UTILITARIANISM
For utilitarians, pleasure and pain are the only principles we should use to assess our actions.
This can also be describes as the ends justify the means; utilitarians agree that the right action is determined by the result of the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. The means of getting to this end (the greatest happiness) is of no consequent.
When considering stem cell, I think that most utilitarians would be in support of further research. Because their views are based solely on the consequences to the action, the use of stem cells to find treatments of disease, illness, and injury would be in the benefit of the greater amount of people. So, for a utilitarian, the greater good is the end with the promise of stem cell advances, and the means (with the ethical and moral objections) would not be a consideration.
For more information, look at Wikipedia's description of Utilitarians

EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY

From Wikipedia, "Epicurus believed that the greatest good was to seek modest pleasures in order to attain a state of tranquility and freedom from fear through knowledge (ataraxia) as well as absence of pain (aponia). The combination of these two states is supposed to constitute happiness in its highest form. Although some equate Epicureanism with hedonism or a form of it (as "hedonism" is commonly understood), professional philosophers of Epicureanism deny that.
For Epicurus, the highest pleasure (tranquility and freedom from fear) was obtained by knowledge, friendship, and living a virtuous and temperate life. He lauded the enjoyment of simple pleasures, by which he meant abstaining from bodily desires, such as sex and appetites, verging on asceticism. He argued that when eating, one should not eat too richly, for it could lead to dissatisfaction later, such as the grim realization that one could not afford such delicacies in the future. Likewise, sex could lead to increased lust and dissatisfaction with the sexual partner. Epicurus did not articulate a broad system of social ethics that has survived."
From the point of Epicurus, I think that stem cell research would be an acceptable avenue to lead to happiness. For those who are suffering, Epicurean philosophy includes an absence of pain. Because stem cells are a promising way to hopefully relieve pain, Epicurus would be all for continued stem cell research. Because stem cells don't mean indulging in bodily desires, I think that he would have no objection to their continued research.

CONCLUSION
By looking at various philosophical frameworks, there are several ways that stem cell research can be validated. Many of the frameworks that Ben addressed in class were ideas that did not include a great amount of ethical and moral consideration. Because the stem cell issue is rooted in ethical and moral objections, many of these frameworks would only see the benefit of stem cells on society and improving the human condition.

This website was created by a student for a Monmouth College course