Ethics in Life
Sciences
Summary of all lectures and
articles - 2023
©2023 A. Arp. All Rights Reserved
,Lectures Ethics in Life Sciences
L1 Ethics as a design principle
Ex: Midgley added led to petrol. Leaded fuel → immense negative impact on human health and
environment. It took more than half a century before all fuels were free of lead (again).
• Toxicity was already known (for some 2000 years)
What happened here?
• Safety for people and planet were clearly not among Midgley’s core values.
• Short-term and local benefits to some were prioritized over long(er)-term costs for many
• These private actors did not assume responsibility for the public good.
Course assumptions
• Science, technology and innovation can help solve problems and be valuable in many ways,
but can also cause new problems.
• Ethics can be a facilitator or even a driver of research, technology and innovation for good.
This minimally requires prevention of future harm. For this, theoretical knowledge and
practical instruments for and hands-on practice in moral deliberation are very valuable.
Science, technology & innovation shape society society shapes science, technology & innovation
• Societal needs and problems should be the starting point of science, technology and
innovation.
• Moral values should be placed at the heart of sciences, technology and innovation.
• Ethics is all about translating values into actions, weighing (different stakeholders’ or
individual actors) values against each other and morally justifying one’s judgements and
actions.
Shared feature of design problems and moral problems: rarely one unique correct solution. Yet one
can often distinguish better from worse solutions. Ethics: how do we justify our choices?
Ethics = practical study of deciding how we ought to act.
Morality = values, norms and beliefs. Providing reasons to justify our decisions.
Why ethics?
• Thomas Hobbs: people always have different self-interests and will always fight with each
other. Is state of nature life is brutish, nasty and short. Moral action implies accepting the
state, with this prevent war between people.
• Immanuel Kant: moral behavior has nothing to do with self-interest. It is an intrinsic desire of
mankind, tied in with man’s rational nature ,to act morally correct.
• John Dewey: we cannot escape being moral, morality is part of human nature.
How to recognize a morally problematic issue? Moral problems arise when the values, rights,
interests, desires of another are at stake or harmed. Ethical reasoning is needed whenever we are
confronted with a moral problem.
• How do we define the other? Who is a proper subject of moral concern?
Ex: plants, animals, crops, farmers, family, colleague, human being, government, ecosystems.
• How do we recognize values, rights, interests and desires?
Values = what is perceived as good or important. Can be translated into norms. Think about what is
means and why it is valuable or relevant.
Ex: what do we say when we say everyone is equal? Equal before the judge? Equal opportunities
(school, work)? Equal capacities?
Therefore, specific and tie values within context.
1
,Moral spheres = morally problematic issues can be found more or less anywhere in different
contexts, different values can be more pertinent. Hence different norms guide our actions in
different situations. A problem can be in a business, professional, public or personal sphere. Many
morally problematic issues in the professional sphere you will be working in involve crossing the
boundaries between 2 or more spheres.
Ex: 1) Personal sphere. Value = loyalty. Norm = one always helps one another. Rules for your relations
in your personal sphere, with family and friends.
2) Business sphere. Values = sustainability and human dignity and autonomy. Norms = one has to
reduce waste and minimize energy usage and slave labor is not accepted. Are rules for business
identity.
3) Professional sphere. Values = integrity of animals and objectivity. Norm: one always has to prevent
conflicts of interest. Rules for e.g. the scientific community.
4) Public sphere. Values = justice and equality.
Values can lead to conflicting norms.
Taking a moral stance means carefully considering and subsequently deciding whether a morally
problematic issue is morally objectionable or not.
3 families of ethical reasoning:
1. Consequentialism (or utilitarianism)
Measure of moral quality = desired states
Core concept: benefit vs costs
Examples: happiness, wellbeing, pleasure and fulfillment.
2. Deontology (or duty ethics) – Immanuel Kant
Measure of moral quality = right actions
Core concept: principles
Examples: respect for dignity, fairness, justice, equality.
3. Virtue ethics - Aristotle
Measure of moral quality = focuses on the person that is acting. Want to be seen as someone
as virtues (good; so contributing to society) or not.
Core concept = what is the character of a virtues person.
Examples: responsibility, charitability, honesty, loyalty.
Recap:
• Ethics is the practical study of deciding how we ought to act.
• We have to engage in ethical reflection when the values, rights, interests, desires of ‘an
other’ are at stake or harmed.
• Almost anything can be morally pertinent to other
• Ethical reasoning requires an open mind and critical reasoning skills
WAIR = Wheel of Action, Interaction and Reflection. Template workshop format that can be used in
the project.
L2 Categorical Imperative
Ethics is all about the systemic reflection towards what we think we ought to do.
Reasons = provides access to the universal truth about the world. Truth, or the objective knowledge
about the laws that govern the world, is an end in itself. But how you arrive at it has been and still is
open to dispute: rationalism(/idealism( vs empiricism(/realism).
• Plato: we arrive at truth through access to ideas
• Aristotle: we arrive at truth through access to the world around us (empirical)
2 families of reason:
2
, 1. Deontology = Immanuel Kant = the categorical imperative; anthropocentric
3 questions that answer all the interest of my reason: 1) what can I know [categories +
experience], 2) what must I do and 3) what may I hope? [afterlife or god].
As rational beings we all have to obey the moral law. Also, our actions are constrained by
physical law. We have the freedom to act in accordance with the moral law. But if you are
free you have to obey the moral law. You can understand what you have to do. You are a
rational human being when you are able to justify what you did (the moral law is not for
plants, animals, babies or mentally disabled persons).
Humans have needs and inclinations, and need commands to keep them on the straight
moral path. Ex: it is morally commanded to help your grandmother instead of taking drugs.
• Freedom is the ability and the will to choose.
o Under threat there is no freedom.
o To follow one’s instincts, passions, pleasures and social environment is not a
choice “in freedom”.
o A choice made in ignorance is not a real choice in freedom.
The free autonomous person, decides for themselves (to obey the moral law).
Moral law = categorical imperative(/obligation) = have to follow this obligation in every
situation = applies to all rational beings, unconditionally. If you understand this you must
adopt it because it is your duty. Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the
same will that is should become a universal law.
• Intention: you will something, you have the intention to do something and you
choose to do so out of free will (autonomy)
• Logic: you want to live in a world in which everyone wills that same action in similar
situations – for you are rational, and so are those your actions concern.
• You can never use another rational being as an end itself. In other words you
cannot use persons for your own good. Golden rule = treat someone else like you
would want to be treated. When 2 rational beings meet, they can never impose
their individual will on the other person, without thereby contradicting their own
freedom. Why? Because that would contradict their own choice to live according to a
universal moral law.
Ex: for the example of the bioweapon job. Kant would say you would not take the job because
with taking the job you would legitimate everyone taking a job in a bioweapons lab which
means it is suddenly an accepted practice that people make bioweapons.
Hypothetical imperative = concerns situation in which there is a necessary relationship
between an end/goal and what you have to do to get there. So the meaning of what you do
is already in the imperative.
Ex: you have to study or at least take the exam in order to pass the course.
Categorical imperative is more about learning what possible consequences of your actions
are, while with the hypothetical imperative you already know these consequences because
you have a goal.
Disadvantages deontology: 1) hard to move from individual decisions to societal decisions, 2)
prioritizing duties and 3) duties towards non-rational beings (because have to treat others
that are also rational in the same way but no info about non-rational beings). Bentham would
say it is not about the questions whether non-rational beings can reason, but if they can feel.
The veil of ignorance = Rawls; type of society we try to realize are fair societies. ‘Those who
engage in social cooperation choose together the principles which are to assign basic rights
and duties and to determine the division of social benefits.’ So rich people have other
perspective on society than the poor and cannot imagine what it’s like for the poor.
2. Consequentialism/utilitarianism = John Stuart Mill = the principle of greatest happiness;
extend to non-humans. What you do or why you do it does not matter for the moral quality
of the act. All that matters is the act’s impact on the aggregate happiness in the world.
3
