Many scientists would argue that the consequence of genetic engineering will increase of pleasure and decrease of pain. For example Illnesses will be prevented. Parents can protect their children from inherited diseases like cystic fibrosis, which would have the consequence of preventing not only their child developing the illness, but their children as well. In theory certain diseases could be wiped out entirely in this way. Also, individual talents like sporting talents or mathematical ability can be enhance. In response to utilitarianisms, they would say that the long-term consequences would be that more people would benefit from such research thus the principle of the greatest good for the greatest number is met.
Bentham’s hedonic calculus can only be applied to those who suffer. Early embryos, it is assumes at this present stage; do not have the capacity to feel pain and so cannot be measured according to the hedonic calculus. However, the benefits of genetic engineering and embryo research are justifiable using the hedonic calculus. For example the pleasures brought about such as cures for diseases like Parkinson’s. Therefore it is possible to say, from a utilitarian point of view that it is better save many lives in the future by embryo research at the cost of a few embryos now.
However, the consequences could also be undesirable. The genetically produced person may feel that their individuality is compromised as they consider their parents' choice of blue eyes, blonde hair and prowess at art. Would ones happiness be fulfilled if they did not enjoy art, or appreciate their colour of hair and eyes. Like today it is not very often that people appreciate their own appearances. One is never going to be fully satisfied thus that principle of the greatest good is unlikely to be met. Furthermore in terms of the hedonic calculus, the pleasure of having the characteristic of blue eyes may not be intense or durable enough. For example it may be hard to carry out the procedure therefore the probability of pleasure is unlikely to occur. Therefore the cost and success rates is out weighed by the amount of pleasure.
When considering stem cell research and genetically engineering crops, utilitarian’s would generally support these actions, as the majority would benefit from this research in the long term. For example, for those people who like to eat strawberries- who would protest against enhanced strawberries of the size of an apple. Without any other extraneous variables happening, no one would be at a disadvantage if they enhanced our foods. However, we should consider a number of problems with this. One of them being, causing disruption to the environment through cross-pollution. This could potentially cause harm to humans by causing allergic reactions or development of new diseases, thus the harm it creates is out weighed by its potential benefits. Additionally this could also lead to exploitation of the developing countries. Therefore it may bring less good about than it not existing before hand.
by
anna01fallhotmailcom (student)
