The argument from normative uncertainty and the ethical evaluation of human embryo research (in Polish)

Article Sidebar

PDF (Polish) PDF (In Polish)
Published: Jun 1, 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.13153/diam.32.2012.481
Keywords:
bioethics, decision theory, human embryos, embryonic stem cells, in vitro fertilization, abortion, normative uncertainty, killing, moral theology, Lockhart, Sepielli

Main Article Content

Tomasz Żuradzki
Jagiellonian University

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to analyze the arguments that proponents of the conservative view on the moral status of the human embryo offer in support of their position. I claim that there exists an argument in favour of the conservative position that has been overlooked by virtually all contemporary bioethicists. It refers not to the metaphysical presumptions about the status of the embryo or its developmental capabilities but rather it is based on the criteria of rational decisions under normative uncertainty. I will demonstrate that this argument, although much stronger than many other arguments in support of the conservative view, has very limited use. My analysis will concentrate on the moral status of the early embryo (until about the 14th day of conception) and therefore will be especially important in the context of recent debates about the moral and legal permissibility of research on human embryonic stem cells.

Article Details

How to Cite
“The Argument from Normative Uncertainty and the Ethical Evaluation of Human Embryo Research (in Polish)”. 2012. Diametros, no. 32 (June): 131-59. https://doi.org/10.13153/diam.32.2012.481.
Issue
No. 32 (2012)
Section
Special topic – Bioethics and genetics

By submitting his/her work to the Editorial Board, the author accepts, upon having his/her text recommended for publication, that Diametros applies the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license to the works we publish. Under this license, authors agree to make articles legally available for reuse, without permission or fees. Anyone may read, download, copy, print, distribute or reuse these articles without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as the author and original source are properly cited. The author holds the copyright without any other restrictions. Full information about CC-BY: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.

Author Biography

Tomasz Żuradzki, Jagiellonian University

Tomasz Żuradzki, PhD
Jagiellonian University
Institute of Philosophy
ul. Grodzka 52
Pl-31-044 Kraków
e-mail: t.zuradzki@uj.edu.pl

How to Cite

“The Argument from Normative Uncertainty and the Ethical Evaluation of Human Embryo Research (in Polish)”. 2012. Diametros, no. 32 (June): 131-59. https://doi.org/10.13153/diam.32.2012.481.
Share |
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

Baertschi, Mauron [2010] – B. Baertschi, A. Mauron, Moral Status Revisited: The Challenge of Reversed Potency, “Bioethics” 24(2) 2010, s. 96-103.

Chyrowicz [2004] – B. Chyrowicz, Embriologia i metafizyka, głos w dyskusji pt. Bioetyka a metafizyka toczonej na forum „Diametros”, dostępne na stronie: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/?l=1&p=deb5&m=17&ii=95.

Colyvan, Cox, Steele [2010] – M. Colyvan, D. Cox, K. Steele, Modelling the Moral Dimension of Decisions, “Noûs” 44/3, s. 503-29.

Deckers [2007] – J. Deckers, Why Eberl is Wrong: Reflections on the Beginning of Personhood, “Bioethics” 21(5) 2007, s. 270-82.

Devolder, Savulescu [2006] – K. Devolder, J. Savulescu, The Moral Imperative to Conduct Embryonic Stem Cells and Cloning Research, “Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics” (15) 2006, s. 7-21.

Devolder, Harris [2007] – K. Devolder, J. Harris, The Ambiguity of the Embryo: Ethical Inconsistency in the Human Embryonic Stem Cell Debate, “Metaphilosophy” 38(2-3) 2007, s. 154-169.

Doerflinger [1999] – R.M. Doerflinger, The Ethics of Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research: A Catholic Viewpoint, “Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal” 9(2) 1999, s. 137-150.

Eberl [2000] – J.T. Eberl, The Beginning of Personhood: A Thomistic Biological Analysis, “Bioethics” 14(2) 2000, s. 134-57.

Eberl [2007] – J.T. Eberl, A Thomistic Perspective on the Beginning of Personhood: Redux, “Bioethics” 21(5) 2007, s. 283-9.

Evangelium Vitae [1995] – Encyklika Evangelium Vitae, dostępne na stronie: http://www.vatican.va/edocs/POL0014/_INDEX.HTM.

Ford [1995] – N.M. Ford, Kiedy powstałem? Problem początku jednostki ludzkiej w historii, filozofii i nauce, tłum. W.J. Popowski, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa 1995.

Gómez-Lobo [2007] – A. Gómez-Lobo, Inviolability at Any Age, “Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal” 17(4) 2007, s. 311-320.

Green [2007] – R.M. Green, Can We Develop Ethically Universal Embryonic Stemcell Lines?, “Nature Reviews. Genetics” (8) 2007, s. 480-5.

Guerrero [2007] – A.A. Guerrero, Don’t Know, Don’t Kill: Moral Ignorance, Culpability, and Caution, “Philosophical Studies” (136) 2007, s. 59-97.

Hansson [2010] – S.O. Hansson, The Harmful Influence of Decision Theory on Ethics, “Ethical Theory & Moral Practice” (13) 2010, s. 585-93.

Hill [2009] – J. Hill, Probabilism Today: Permissibility and Multi-Account Ethics, “Australasian Journal of Philosophy” 87(2) 2009, s. 235-50.

George, Tollefsen [2008] – R.P. George, C. Tollefsen, Embryo. A Defense of Human Life, Doubleday, New York 2008.

Jackson, Smith [2006] – F. Jackson, M. Smith, Absolutists Moral Theories and Uncertainty, “Journal of Philosophy” 103(6) 2006, s. 267-83.

Jonsen, Toulmin [1989] – A.R. Jonsen, S. Toulmin, The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning, University of California Press, Berkeley 1989.

Katechizm [1994] – Katechizm Kościoła katolickiego, Pallottinum, Poznań 1994.

Kongregacja [1974] – Kongregacja Nauki Wiary, Deklaracja o przerywaniu ciąży, dostępne na stronie: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docu ments/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19741118_declaration-abortion_pl.html.

Kongregacja [1987] – Kongregacja Nauki Wiary, Instrukcja o szacunku dla rodzącego się życia ludzkiego i o godności jego przekazywania. Odpowiedzi na niektóre aktualne zagadnienia (Donum Vitae), dostępne na stronie: http://www.vatican.va/ roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_resp ect-for-human-life_pl.html.

Kongregacja [2008] – Kongregacja Nauki Wiary, Instrukcja ‘Dignitatis Personae’ dotycząca niektórych problemów bioetycznych, dostępna na stronie: http://www.vatican.va/ roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dig nitas-personae_pl.html.

Lee [2004] – P. Lee, The Pro-Life Argument Form Substantial Identity: A Defence, “Bioethics” 18(3) 2004, s. 249-263.

Lockhart [2000] – T. Lockhart, Moral Uncertainty and Its Consequences, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2000.

Marquis [1989] – D. Marquis, Why Abortion is Immoral, “Journal of Philosophy” 86(4) 1989, s. 183-202; przedruk w polskim tłumaczeniu w: W. Galewicz (red.), Antologia bioetyki, t. 2: Początki życia ludzkiego, Universitas, Kraków 2010, s. 215-37.

Marquis [2007] – D. Marquis, The Moral-Principle Objection to Human Embronic Stem Cell Research, “Metaphilosophy” (38) 2007, s. 190-206.

May [2005] – S. May, Principled Compromise and the Abortion Controversy, “Philosophy & Public Affairs” (33) 2005, s. 317-48.

Moller [2011] – D. Moller, Abortion and Moral Risk, “Philosophy” (86) 2011, s. 425-43.

Neri [2011] – D. Neri, The Race Toward ‘Ethically Universally Acceptable’ Human Pluripotent (Embryonic-like) Stem Cell: Only a Problem of Sources?, “Bioethics” 25(5) 2011, s. 260-6.

Noonan [1970] – J.T. Noonan, An Almost Absolute Value in History, [w:] The Morality of Abortion: Legal and Historical Perspectives, red. J.T. Noonan, Cambridge, Harvard University Press 1970, s. 51-59, przedruk w polskim tłumaczeniu w: W. Galewicz (red.), Antologia bioetyki, t. 2: Początki życia ludzkiego, Universitas, Kraków 2010, s. 135-144.

Ord [2008] – T. Ord, The Scourge: Moral Implications of Natural Embryo Loss, “American Journal of Bioethics”, 8(7) 2008, s. 12-9.

Pascal [1997] – B. Pascal, Myśli, przeł. T. Żeleński, PAX, Warszawa.

Ross [2006] – J. Ross, Rejecting Ethical Deflationism, “Ethics” 116(4) 2006, s. 742-68.

Sejm [1993] – Ustawa o planowaniu rodziny, ochronie płodu ludzkiego i warunkach dopuszczalności przerywania ciąży (Dz.U. z 1993 r. Nr 17, poz. 78 z późniejszymi zmianami).

Sejm [2006] – Uchwała Sejmu Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej z dnia 21 lipca 2006 r. w sprawie finansowania badań nad ludzkimi embrionami i zarodkowymi komórkami macie- rzystymi, „Monitor Polski” z 2006 r. Nr 51, poz. 550.

Sepielli [2009] – A. Sepielli, What to do when you don’t know what to do, [w:] Oxford Studies in Metaethics, R. Shafer-Landau (red.), t. 4, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009, s. 5-28.

Sepielli [2012] – A. Sepielli, Moral Uncertainty and the Principle of Equity among Moral Theories, “Philosophy & Phenomenological Research” DOI: 10.1111/j.1933- 1592.2011.00554.x

Shannon, Wolter [1990] – T.A. Shannon, A.B. Wolter, Reflections on the Moral Status of the Pre-Embryo, “Theological Studies” (51) 1990, s. 603-26.

Singer [1980] – P. Singer, Animals and the Value of Life, [w:] Matters of Life and Death, red. T. Regan, Random House, New York 1980.

Smith [2002] – M. Smith, Evaluation, Uncertainty and Motivation, “Ethical Theory & Moral Practice” (5) 2002, s. 305-20.

Tauer [1984] – C.A. Tauer, The Tradition of Probabilism and the Moral Status of the Early Embryo, “Theological Studies” (45) 1984, s. 3-33.

Trybunał Konstytucyjny [1997] – Orzeczenie z dnia 28 maja 1997 r., Sygn. akt K. 26/96.

Walters [2008] – L. Walters, An Intercultural Perspective on Embryonic Stem Cells Research, [w:] Stem Cells, Human Embryos and Ethics. Interdisciplinary Perspectives, red. L. Østnor, Springer, 2008, s. 91-109.

Wendler [1999] – D. Wendler, Understanding the ‘Conservative’ View on Abortion, “Bioethics” 13(1) 1999, s. 32-56.

Woleński [2004] – J. Woleński, Rozumowanie Lockharta nie jest przekonywające, głos w dyskusji pt. Bioetyka a metafizyka toczonej na forum „Diametros”, dostępne na stronie: http://www.diametros.iphils.uj.edu.pl/?l=1&p=deb5&m=17&ii=105.