Sociology

Ethical Dilemma The creation of genetically modified products will boost food production and answer the issues of food shortage. However it is against ethical standards to modify the creation of nature and play as God. Even though it is against ethical values, should scientists pursue genetically modified products to solve food global scarcity

     In our growing society, there has been integrating ethics to professional work. As our environment develops, new questions are arising for inevitable confrontation. It cannot be anymore ignored and forgotten. (Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler,  Tipton, 1991) Such issues would be the ethical considerations in the development in science and technology. It is unprecedented that the help that science and technology has given mankind is remarkable. Our society would be as complex as it is if not for the innovations. Life would never be the same because of the development.  It may be expressed that humanity has lived an easier life because of science and technology. However, in lieu new discoveries and inventions, some cultures and institutions are indignant. Therefore, there is a need for these advancements to be arbitrated with ethical considerations. Ethics is considered as the unchanging moral standard true for all types of culture. Some examples would be the golden rule that do not do onto others what you do not wish to undertake and always revere the almighty God. But, as mentioned, the ethical dilemma in science and technology is very complicated and arduous to resolve.

    One of the most famous men in ancient Greece was Aristotle. He positioned ethics within practical philosophy as correlated to politics (Capurro, 2005). It developed into an academic approach to consider doable philosophy as encompassing the three sub-disciplines, explicitly economics, politics and ethics. During ancient times, philosophy was considered as the major contributor for the creation of public policies. He reiterates that in a satisfying public policy, the needs of the society should be considered. (Capurro, 2005) The term needs refers to the general benefit or happiness, it does not necessarily mean as a whole. Hobbes, on the other hand, talks about the Leviathan which is a rational andartificial institutionin differ to the ancientbeliefs of Aristotle. The Leviathan is portrayed as the state which is reflected by the nature of the individuals in the society. He implies that the unisonof all the individuals comprises an independent form that governs the group. (Capurro, 2005)

However, in Kants perception of morality as contrasting to legality differs basically from the Aristotelian conception. Kant suggests that there should be a fundamental difference between policies with legality and morality. (Capurro, 2005) Furthermore, he portrays that there shouldnt be an absolute independency between legality and morality. John Locke, on the other hand, stated that the socially sound decision should meet the choice of the majority and not necessarily as a whole. He argues that it is very difficult and almost impossible to address a unanimous choice for society and therefore, should come up with a majority choice.  The theory of Locke in his social contract is retracted by John Stuart Mills despotism in the sense that he agrees that the choices government should make would be in accordance in the best interest of the population. (Capaldi, 2003) In the view of consequentialism, the ethically correct action should be an outcome of goodness for the whole society. (Singer, 2002)

Present societies, mostly in Western democracies, are essentially affected by contractual, moral and historical paradigms. Moral traditions, inclined with ethics, develop the foundation of the democratic constitutions. This is predominantly apparent for example, with regard to such ideas as human dignity or pursuit of happiness. In modern democracies, including supranational political structures does not anymore encompass the wholeness of neither the Leviathan nor the ancient polis.(Capurro, 2005) With modernity comes the new age of freedom. Explorations to the different fields of science are springing. It pegs the question whether where should be the boundary of the exploration should limit due to ethical considerations. (Bellah, et al., 1991) The beginning of Modernity ethical reflection is now practiced in the academic and political institutions.

Two Unappealing Choices
Biotechnology is the alteration or modification of a living organism to develop its feature through science and engineering. (Biotechnology, 2006) The problem with biotechnology is that the scientists that modify the creation of nature are considered to be playing God. It makes a fearful assumption that if living creatures can be restructured then so can man. Some argue that companies are genetically modifying their products only to increase their profits and revoke the welfare of others.

    In the defense of the scientists and corporation that are thrown with ethical issues, they come to a statement with their own ethical reasoning. They propose that the advancements that they create in the field of science should not be thwarted with ethics in public policy because their researches are independent and does not dictate the course of the society. (Biotechnology, 2006) Most of them claim that they have the freedom to explore the unknown and that the perception of the benefits of their findings from the general public is much more important than the ranting of a few. It pegs the question, wouldnt it be greater to pursue stem cell regeneration which can cure paralysis rather than revoke it due to the fear of its unverified expense. In the economic theory of cost-benefit analysis, there will always be losers in any given situation. The best outcome would that the winners would compensate the lost of the other side. (Bellah, et al., 1991) The choice of continuing genetically modified products would compensate global food scarcity but will revoke the ethical standards.  There is not much time to spare and must argue with ethical values in the expense food starvation.

    On the other hand, environmentalist and activists claim that too much advancement in the field of sciences will be harmful to the society. It is stated in the accounts of the scientists and corporations that the costs incurred in their researches are miniscule compared the immense benefit derived. However, their defense is that unquantifiable objects are actually being damaged in the process with are not valued in the process. Morality is one object that is being highly damaged in the process. (Bostrom, 2007) For example, consumers can enjoy large chunks of roasted chicken because of biotechnology and could explicate gluttony. In recent surveys, it was 44 of the American respondents said it is morally incorrect to genetically modify animals. Even in economic theory, there lacks a variable to complete the cost benefit analysis. (Bellah, et al., 1991) The choice of rejecting genetic modification of products would result to continuous food scarcity until an alternative ethical method is discovered.

Thesis The dilemma of the genetically modification of products should not be independent of ethical standards. Professional engagement should be incorporated with ethical values.

    The purpose of consideration and moral presuppositions arises mostly, but not entirely, to new discoveries and creations in the fields of science and technology. (Bostrom, 2007) There should be a sound and unbiased argumentation and to aid decisions that should facilitate politicians and society to get a clearer outlook of the minutiae of scientific, technical, and legal issues as seen from an ethical standpoint. Technological transformation is in large part accountable for the development of basic parameters of the human condition such as size of world population, life expectancy, educational altitude, physical standards of living, nature of profession, interaction, health and different human activities affecting nature. In the sense that technological revolutions hold such intense implication, there arise issues to focus on the strong ethical deliberation and feature centrally in public policy analysis. (Bostrom, 2007) Moreover, there should be a corresponding amount of effort given to these issues to ensure that mankind is still making the right decisions.

    In the contention of which argument is right in accordance to the thesis, the implications should be weighted. (Bellah, et al., 1991) In the side of the scientists, they believe that genetic modification of organism would answer food scarcity even if it is against ethical standards. The implication that they perceive is that it is correct to act even though it is against ethical values. It entails the notion for the greater good. However, it does not take in consideration the impact of their action to the society. If the world will partake in the genetic modification of animals, against ethical standards for the purposes of the greater good then it can indicate the other greater good actions which also against ethical values can be undertaken. If our ethical values are not followed then it will cause chaos and dispute to the society. The authenticity of our ethical values must be constantly abided for the people to adhere the concordance of lifes understanding to preserve peace. This is the importance of incorporating ethical values to professional work. It is to perceive that decisions are constantly affecting society as a whole and not partially. (Bellah, et al., 1991) Therefore there should be ethical judiciousness in the choices made.

    In the side of the environmentalists that genetic modification should be stopped, their actions can perpetuate food scarcity. However, their intention is genuinely to preserve the way of life. The argument might not solve the problem yet, but there could come a time that food scarcity will be answered by ethically sound actions. Therefore, genetically modified products should be decelerated to be examined thoroughly for ethical considerations. The genetic modification of products should be attuned to the ethical standards of society.