Doctrine of Utilitarianism and Stem Cells
The use of stem cells has been a hotbed of debate for many years. Lawmakers, philosophers, theologians, scientists, and physicians all have their reasons as to whether or not we should or should not pursue the use of stem cells, as well as pursue stem cell research. We should, of course, continue to research stem cells and use them in any way that can manufacture better lives for humans based on simply on the Doctrine of Utilitarianism.
Most of the controversy surrounding stem cell research and the use of stem cells surrounds morality. However, the Doctrine of Utilitarianism puts this controversy to rest by stating that any action is of sound moral worth as long as it can be determined to bring a solid contribution to those around it. Thus, if stem cell research and the use of stem cells maximizes said utility of those who would benefit from said research and cells, the actions therein would be deemed morally just because the work would maximize the happiness of all people. Therefore, because stem cell research and use does maximize the utility and happiness of those who are benefit from it, it is a morally just action.
Stem cells, whether through research or the use of them is thought to be able to bring many different advantages to the lives of people that would assuredly maximize their happiness. For example, victims of paralysis could experience the use of their limbs again thanks to stem cells. Individuals who have experienced severe burns on small or large quantities of their bodies could use stem cells to make natural looking skin grafts. Stem cells can also be used to grow human organs. In these scenarios, a person in need of a donor would never have to wait again, thus risking the chance of dying on a waiting list because a perfect match could eventually be grown in a reasonable amount of time. All of these and many other uses have been discovered for stem cells, and all would maximize the happiness of the parties involved.
There are, of course, arguments against the use of stem cells. Some believe stem cell research and the use of stem cells is actually immoral, and most of these claims are rooted in how the cells are harvested or used. For example, many state it is like playing god because it is tampering with some divine master plan. Science cares not for such things, nor does philosophy when it concerns itself with maximizing the utility and happiness of humanity. Others claim how we harvest stem cells is immoral, because many stem cells are retrieved from aborted fetuses. Theologians in particular believe once a fetus is conceived it must be born and to abort is immoral. To begin, we can harvest stem cells from teeth, as well and even to do so from an aborted fetus cannot be considered immoral especially with the “mother’s” consent. To end, according to the Doctrine of Utilitarianism, it would not matter where the stem cells were harvested from as long as utility was maximized; the actions would still be deemed as moral.
In sum, according to the Doctrine of Utilitarianism, the use and study of stem cells is a moral action. Their uses maximize the happiness of all parties involved. They also maximize the utility of all parties involved. By these standards, all arguments against stem cells fall short. Because of their impact on humanity, to be in support of them is a morally justifiable action.
