Rule Utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism theory which says that “a right action is one that conforms to a rule that, if followed consistently, would create for everyone involved the most beneficial balance of good over bad”. This means that we should create a list of actions that are relevant to the situation, then for each of these actions listed we determine the net utility. After that we choose our rule to be the action with the highest net utility, which is one that bring the maximum happiness, welfare and well-being to everyone if followed. If we use this theory and apply cloning as our situation here, we can make the following box with two actions:
• Action A: Human cloning should be allowed to be used by Scientists without any …show more content…
Then, this action if considered a rule and is followed by everyone, it will produce a high net utility, because it will cause not a single human to be cloned therefore there will be no harm and may lead to discovery of important observations that will help improve people’s live, thus producing more good than harm to humans. Therefore according to Rule Utilitarianism, action B should be chosen and human cloning must be banned worldwide.
Kantianism: This is the Kant’s ethical theory and it is based on “doing the moral duty, no matter what the desires might be”. The tools that Kant gave to determine what the right moral duty is, depends on meeting and passing two requirements, universality and the respect for persons.
Universality (Universal Law): means that while choosing an action or principle (which Kant called “maxim”) that we are willing to do in a particular situation, we should make sure that everyone else would be willing to do it as well. For example, if you expect people to keep their promises as a moral act, then you also are obliged to follow that and keep your …show more content…
We can conclude that to meet the Universality requirement, Action A should be eliminated because if we already know that there will be a high probability of defects and harm to the surrogate mothers and the cloned human in process. Then it’s morally not permissible or logical that we will choose a moral standard for everyone to follow which causes risks that can kill human beings. To meet the Respect for person requirement, again Action A should be eliminated, This is clearly because in human cloning, the donors which are human beings are being treated as tools and exploited for the sake of the of the scientists research goals. As a result, the action which passes the two requirements, is Action B, therefore we should ban human cloning worldwide because it’s a decision that doesn’t not exploit anyone, a moral standard what will never cause harm to human beings and which logically we want everyone to
• Action A: Human cloning should be allowed to be used by Scientists without any …show more content…
Then, this action if considered a rule and is followed by everyone, it will produce a high net utility, because it will cause not a single human to be cloned therefore there will be no harm and may lead to discovery of important observations that will help improve people’s live, thus producing more good than harm to humans. Therefore according to Rule Utilitarianism, action B should be chosen and human cloning must be banned worldwide.
Kantianism: This is the Kant’s ethical theory and it is based on “doing the moral duty, no matter what the desires might be”. The tools that Kant gave to determine what the right moral duty is, depends on meeting and passing two requirements, universality and the respect for persons.
Universality (Universal Law): means that while choosing an action or principle (which Kant called “maxim”) that we are willing to do in a particular situation, we should make sure that everyone else would be willing to do it as well. For example, if you expect people to keep their promises as a moral act, then you also are obliged to follow that and keep your …show more content…
We can conclude that to meet the Universality requirement, Action A should be eliminated because if we already know that there will be a high probability of defects and harm to the surrogate mothers and the cloned human in process. Then it’s morally not permissible or logical that we will choose a moral standard for everyone to follow which causes risks that can kill human beings. To meet the Respect for person requirement, again Action A should be eliminated, This is clearly because in human cloning, the donors which are human beings are being treated as tools and exploited for the sake of the of the scientists research goals. As a result, the action which passes the two requirements, is Action B, therefore we should ban human cloning worldwide because it’s a decision that doesn’t not exploit anyone, a moral standard what will never cause harm to human beings and which logically we want everyone to