Monkeys? Humans? The ethics of testing diesel fumes
How far can one go for the testing of a harmful substance on a living being in hopes to aid the masses? German car manufacturer Volkswagen has recently come under fire as it has been discovered that they have been subjecting both humans and monkeys to diesel fumes for hours in order to test the effectiveness of their so-called "Eco-friendly" exhaust system. Participants were subject to up to 2 hours of diluted diesel fumes. Humans subjected were given a consent form to sign, however, monkeys, of course, were not. Backlash is, of course, received from both inside and outside the scientific community, with scientists and humanitarians alike urging for the halt and retribution of these actions. The article has even referred to such methodology as "controversial, and possibly unethical".
Thus providing an excellent transition into ethics. This instance is not the first of its kind. Makeup companies have constantly been under fire for their testing on animals and the ethical implications of doing so. So, what makes such an act so unethical? If we are to take on the belief of deontology, we must treat all living things as equal and so, regardless of creature, the torture of these living things is wrong and unethical. The reasoning behind such an act should not matter. A utilitarian may disagree, saying that the use of these few lives will ultimately benefit countless others. In other words, it matters not if a few living beings are used in experiments that were undertaken to bring a greater good to the world. This was the case for Chrisopher Carlsten, a professor at the University of British Columbia "There do seem to be individuals who are frustrated that this work is done at all. I would ask them to look at the evidence that these studies, when appropriately done, contribute significantly to the evidence that leads to regulations that protect the public from adverse air quality," Divine command theory states that any taking of life is wrong and must be held accountable for their actions but is also punishable by ones own death at times.
Thus providing an excellent transition into ethics. This instance is not the first of its kind. Makeup companies have constantly been under fire for their testing on animals and the ethical implications of doing so. So, what makes such an act so unethical? If we are to take on the belief of deontology, we must treat all living things as equal and so, regardless of creature, the torture of these living things is wrong and unethical. The reasoning behind such an act should not matter. A utilitarian may disagree, saying that the use of these few lives will ultimately benefit countless others. In other words, it matters not if a few living beings are used in experiments that were undertaken to bring a greater good to the world. This was the case for Chrisopher Carlsten, a professor at the University of British Columbia "There do seem to be individuals who are frustrated that this work is done at all. I would ask them to look at the evidence that these studies, when appropriately done, contribute significantly to the evidence that leads to regulations that protect the public from adverse air quality," Divine command theory states that any taking of life is wrong and must be held accountable for their actions but is also punishable by ones own death at times.
from reading your blog post I am able to understand your real-life situation about the ethical testing on animals. I really liked the way you commented on the different perspective on the issues and complications of each perfection which provides a very thorough. I was wondering on your opinion on the matter?
ReplyDelete