• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How can you or your society decide ethically which knowledge should or should not be pursued?

Extracts from this document...


THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE ESSAY: Name: Matthew Jackson School: Wesley College Glen Waverly Campus Candidate number: D0612-011 Topic: How can you or your society decide ethically which knowledge should or should not be pursued? Word count: 1599 HOW CAN YOU OR YOUR SOCIETY DECIDE ETHICALLY WHICH KNOWLEDGE SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT BE PURSUED? In modern society there is a constant pursuit of knowledge. With the relentless momentum that our quest for knowledge has in modern times it is necessary to distinguish exactly what knowledge can be ethically sought. Given the many conflicting schools of philosophy that dictate to us what is and is not ethical, it is difficult to determine what is the best way for us to decide, but while all methods are flawed, there is doubtless one technique that is the least so, this we shall determine. This problem has been pertinent to science of late, given recent advances into the field of stem-cell research, though its is relevant to many areas of knowledge: sensitive research in history or the ethicality of a psychology experiment. However deciding whether the pursuit of knowledge is ethical does not have to be nearly so broad-reaching, it relates to the emotive ways of knowing as much as the perceptive: I was talking with Tom1, a friend of mine. ...read more.


It was a German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who created an entirely new school of ethics in "Kantian" ethics. Under Kantian ethics, rational moral individuals have a certain intrinsic value, and so cannot be weighed on a scale as Utilitarian ethics suggest. Kantianism holds that individuals should not be sacrificed for the common good. Finally, it argues that motive is of the utmost importance, i.e. an action is unethical regardless of its outcome, if its initial intent was malicious. Closely linked to Kantian ethics is the 'natural rights theory' that is, that rational beings have intrinsic rights, the right to live, the right to freedom, property. Few ethicists can agree on exactly what these 'rights' are. Under these the ethicality of stem cell research depends on both whether you regard a foetus as a moral being, thereby privy to rights and liberties and whether you regard the research as violating those rights. My relationship problem is less controversial, in undertaking a relationship with Sal she has trusted me with her feelings, and has the right to have that trust honoured, and it would violate her right to hurt her. Ethical theories that imply a set of natural rights are indeed well merited, but as with utilitarianism it is a flawed ideology. ...read more.


Obviously this system has its faults: first some of the criteria are not pertinent to every decision. Also it is sometimes difficult for all parties concerned to participate: for example if one were to decide on the ethicality of aborting a foetus, then the decision concerns the potential person in question, but they are unable to submit their opinion. Likewise if we were to consider my initial example of my girlfriend, then the decision concerns both her and Warwick certainly, but if I were to ask them to offer their opinion on the ethicality of the matter, then the decision would be made already. These faults are simply something inherent to the method, and must be tolerated, they are not ideal, but neither are they so gross as to invalidate the system totally. The system has many merits and despite its faults is likely the best proposal here, basing the system around principals rather than theories makes the system simpler for the layman, less controversial for the philosophers, and flexible in its application. I feel that the best way to make an decision on the pursuit of knowledge, or for that matter any ethical dilemma is to weigh it against the principals which are set out above, but all techniques are flawed in some way and it is the prerogative of any rational being to make her own choice. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Ethics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Ethics essays

  1. Aristotle - Virtue Ethics Essay

    The mother could become more virtuous by keeping the child because it would test her character and would make her have to think always someone else as well as her self, yet by aborting the foetus, the mother could focus her efforts fully on become more virtuous.

  2. Problems with Utilitarian and Kantian Ethics.

    Many find that utilitarianism is too demanding of us, that it asks too much of us when placed in real situations. An example is given of a perfectly healthy person going into a doctor's office who has five other patients in need of transplants.

  1. Religion and Medical Ethics

    If they decided that they do not want to freeze them for future use, or destroy them they can donate them. Embryos that were not used for IVF treatment and were donated by the couple can anonymously donate them to other couples for use in their treatment.

  2. Euthanasia can never be justified

    The Christian belief that you should treat others as you wish to be treated yourself and the principle of agape (Christian love for one another) may over rule the sanctity of life and euthanasia may be considered the most loving action.

  1. which are the best ways to achieve knowledge?

    For example, we all know that if we throw a ball into the air we can expect it to fall back down, and that is because we have received this information through our senses, we have seen it happen many times so we expect it to do the same.

  2. RE crousework topic 9

    (Quran 2:271) Donating without others knowing is in some situations better for the charitable person, because it may shield their affection to give, and in some cases it may also benefit the receiver of the charity because it let's them hold onto their dignity and honour.

  1. Different religious and philosophical views on controversial topics.

    Surely charity should be a natural human instinct? Is it ethical that we only give when others pull on our heart strings? Buddhist A Buddhist would say that all of our possessions should be given to charity because ownership and desiring are the primary causes or rebirth, and by giving to others we are putting them in a

  2. Explain how Aristotle and Alasdair Macintyre applied Virtue Theory to moral decision making?

    What virtuous people will understand is that they cannot instantiate one virtue, such as caring, by failing to instantiate another virtue, such as integrity. In any particular situation, the virtuous person acts in such a way that these virtues are instantiated.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work