Certainly the methods to go about obtain the research is seemingly unethical, but look at how we have learned in the past. Meaning that, it would be foolish to basically throw out the research on the grounds of which it was obtained. Might as well make use of the results now that the damage is done. Throughout the years we've already taken research and research results and implement them regardless of how they were obtained.
page 2 of 3 « Previous 1 2 3 Next » 50 total items
-
To regret one's own experiences is to arrest one's own development. To deny one's own experiences is to put a lie into the lips of one's life. It is no less than a denial of the soul. -- Oscar Wilde- Oct 14, 2005
- Gallery
-
Of ourse we should use the data. Just because the data was cruelly obtained doesn't make it any less valid. Failure to use it just means they suffered in vain.
I am invincible!
- Oct 31, 2005
- Gallery
-
Well from a Utilitarian stand point the ends justify the means so yeah. I don't like what the guy did, but that is in the past so why not allow others to benifite from the experaments.
- Oct 31, 2005
- Gallery
-
The reason why I created this thread was because I was talking to a friend who took an ethics class about this issue, and the conversation eventually turned into a somewhat heated debate that didn't really get anywhere. Interesting to see that the majority seems comfortable with, if not supportive of, the use of these data..
"Faith means believing in something that will only make sense in reverse."
"When men are the most sure and arrogant they are commonly the most mistaken..."- Oct 31, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by unicorn2006 The reason why I created this thread was because I was talking to a friend who took an ethics class about this issue
Why are we letting their suffering all go to waste? I really think the data should be put to good use. However, we must put into consideration the stress of the experimental population."Truth is relative"
A statement which is relatively true...
- Oct 31, 2005
- Gallery
-
There's no real reason not to. It was inhumane the way the data was collected, but information should still be used. Many experiments from the past were inhumane, yet we still use the information gathered.
Take the Stanford Prison Experiment, when within 4 days, college students became brutal prison guards and revolting prisoners. From this, we learn what happens to people with absolute power.
- Oct 31, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote by NazarovYes, we are already using the data. To not use the data will have made the victims suffering and death pointless and meaningless.
Though it was a cruel and tragic thing to have happened to them, at least their legacy may help other people.Seconded.
Quote by unicorn whether or not we use the data, is it ethical..?
I guess people who are against this see it as salvaging 'good' from evil and - to put it rashly - taking advantage of the victims' unspeakable suffering. By using the data, people think that what the Nazis did is, in a sense, justified. So many don't exactly see this as 'honoring' the dead.
Nothing can justify what they did. However, if we really wanted to push a topic like this, we could say that most of our technological advances should have been discarded. I mean, we DO make the farthest advances in times of war. "How can we kill people more efficiently?" and then we research and figure out stuff :P
Quote by SonicWindOne of the things the Americans wanted to do during the war was to capture the German scientists because they knew how to create an atomic bomb.
Not that that made any difference. The German scientists really didn't know what the crap they were doing. Most of the Germans that worked on our atomic bomb were refugees or left in protest of Hitler :P And Oppenheimer was in charge of recruiting people for the project anyway.
Quote by SonicWindI guess the German scientists just can't refuse. It would either be spending the rest of their lives in jail OR work for the Americans and get paid a shit load of money a year.
Eh...if I remember correctly, most of the German scientists were tried for war crimes and bit the bullet. But I'm a bit hazy on this one...
Quote by SonicWindI thought you'd all like to know, Japan believed they had the knowledge to build atomic bombs, so Germany sent them the radioactive materials using a U-boat. That U-boat was captured and the radioactive materials were created into atomic bombs by the Americans which destroyed 2 cities of Japan.
This sounded a little fishy, so I decided to do a little research. According to this, the Plutonium used for Trinity and Fat Man were processed in the US :P http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project#The_uranium_bomb
Quote by SonicWindI believe nazis are pricks, but knowledge that could benefit us and throw it all away is a stupid move. So what that nazis tortured Jews to gain this information. If you seen Fight Club, then you'll know what I mean. "Without pain or suffering, we would have nothing."
I don't like the pain or suffering quote, even though its true, for the most part. By saying that quote, its like saying "we had to sacrifice people to gain this knowledge. I'd like to think there are more peaceful ways to gain it. But yeah, really stupid if we toss knowledge after its been already done. I can't remember who said it in the thread, but the important thing is to prevent it from happening again.
NOTE: For some reason, if I quote that as Unicorn2006, the whole quote tag dies...so, yeah...
- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
-
There are multiple ethical systems with which we can look at this as an ethical issue:
First, if we base a moral judgement on the motive of those using the data, in other words, if we approach a deontological view, then so long as the motive of using the data is for the betterment of society, then it can be deemed ethically right. Of course, there then raises the question of what "bettering society" means and how you judge that, but in the present argument, if we juge things by the motives, then I think we should separate those who are currently using the data from those who first obtained the data.
Second, utilitarianism, greatest good for the greatest number, which would then be a teleological assessment. What ultimate end will result? If more people will be helped through use of the data than if we do not use the data, then utilitarianism will argue that definitely using the data is moral because you are creating the greatest end benefit. Of course, this will also raise other questions, such as how certain can one be of whatever end one posits and what degree of certainty do we require in making this ethical decision?
Third, virtual ethics, a la Aristotle and other Stoic philosophers. Aristotle's Four Cardinal virtues are listed as prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance. Does using data obtained ini such fashion preserve or violate justice? If so, does that not assume that there is a universal standard of justice? I would argue that a virtuous person in the Aristotelian sense would not use this data because of how it was obtained. Prudence will dictate that one use reason to determine if a decision violates justice. The virtuous person will most likely deem that the method that obtained the data did violate justice. Then fortitude and temperance will dictate that he must not further the injustice by using data thus obtained.
There are of course other ethical considerations, but I think the above three are the main ones.
I myself would assess this issue from an utilitarian perspective. I would argue that advances in medicine is in fact certain, and that these advances, by virtue of being advances, will certainly provide benefits to greater numbers of people. Therefore, I would use the data in order to maximize the greatest benefit.
EternalParadox
Previously the Forum, Vector Art, and Policy Moderator- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
Kyoo69
me -> Kyo`
-
If it would be important or helpful/useful in any way, then the data should be used without a doubt. I agree, the way it was collected was terrible. But you can't change what happened no matter what, so throwing away valuable research information would mean that all the pain and suffering people went through were for nothing.
up up and away
- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
-
i have to agree with the statement of utilitarian view, i agree as well with Eternal paradox, it is moral to use that research data simply because if they can save more lives in return for those that were killed for it to be obtained, why not.
whatever happened, happened in the past, we can read about about hstory, but we cannot change it, dwelling in the past and those that conflict the morals, it is wrong, because it is not progressive, there is no point.personally, there is a fine line between right and wrong, if you use the data to perfect a certain drug which may cure a once incurable disease (theorathically), you would have saved millions, and millions more would view that as the right route to take, because you did, the present in given a future, a bright one.
on the other hand, however, because you refused to use it because it was obtained in an immoral fashion, and that so resulting in losing a few more million lives, and more and more until you can find out the same result using another means, which could take decades, you have sinned against mankind, though not God, you have sinned against fellow humans that would have benefitted from your usage of that research data readily available, you could have perfected that certain drug decades ahead. without going through the entire process to avoid moral issues.
Click signature for my blog
The wind of destiny blows, and the descendant shall walk the earth once more...- Currently watching: Otoko no ko wa Maid Fuku ga Osuki
- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
- Anime Watchlist
-
Quote by unicorn2006*medico-military research: freezing, high altitude, sea water experiements, sulfanilamide, TB experiments, etc
*others: poison, wound, artificial insemination, sterilization experiments
You left out anatomy textbooks. Every doctor in the world has either read or owned a copy of an anatomy book that was created by the Nazi Medical Research. It is a tough choice to choose between the rights of the of the people already dead and the right of the people that will be saved by that knowedge.
www.transluscent.net/perspective/
Gain a little Perspective- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
-
I have yet to hear a good reason NOT to, just vague concepts of "honor" and "respect". Closest thing to a
real reason was Shinsengumi's statement, that using it might justify future inhumanity. And i totally see the
point there, because it just well might. But on the other hand, it's knowledge for pete's sake. Since when did
we get to decide what knowledge is free and what knowledge should be hidden?Think of it kind of like this. You're stranded on a desert island, so you and your friends ration out food.
Somebody dies. Are you going to throw out his food rations because they were "his" and he's dead and now
you have to respect the dead? Or are you going to re-ration out the food so everyone else has a better
chance of surviving?
www.outofphase.tk -Online Manga, Sketchbook Gallery, and how to Draw Tutorials- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
-
Yes, the data should be used. There's no point in hiding data that could save alot of people with the reason of how horribly it was obtained. No matter if we use the data or not the past will still stay as horrible and cruel as it is. But if we use the data we could at least make some twisted kind of "meaning" out of their pain and death. Cause there's no way to ignore the fact that it happened, it's just a question if we should make the best we can of the awful situation. I say yes because of that reason.
God is just something mankind made up so they could blame everything that they couldn't explain on something.
- Nov 03, 2005
- Gallery
-
I say we should use the data. The way of obtaining some of these research data is definitely cruel and should not be allowed to happen again.
But think about it this way, maybe these data can be used to save or improve millions of lives in the present and future.
But then I study biochemistry and aimed to be a scientist...so I am probably biased...
- Nov 05, 2005
- Gallery
-
Somethin got to come out of the darkness that is good.
"We do not have to visit a madhouse to find disordered minds; our planet is the mental institution of the universe."
- Nov 07, 2005
- Gallery
-
'Honoring' the death by withholding the possible means of savings lives now is pointless. While it was horrible what they went through, the fact remains that they are dead. Why cause more deaths when they could be prevented?
It's easy to say the world is corrupt and humans should all die-- that we are worthless and incapable of more. It's harder to do something to help. Maybe everyone is a bit too lazy.
- Nov 07, 2005
- Gallery
-
It all comes down to the statement: Does the ends justify the means? We have to remember that the ends include all outcomes including the bad which shinsengumi has partially addressed. But....
I have to also agree with the statement of utilitarian view. The data should not go to waste if it can save more lives in return. The past is the past and the future is what we should be concerned about. While I partially agree with shinsengumi that this stance does fall into the slippery slope theory where minor exceptions will lead to more exception in the future, I think that our society has evolved safe guards that keep most researchers in check (preventing our quick slide down the slopes so to speak). Most research has to go through the ethical approval by ethics boards in order for most scientific journals to publish them and even for funding. Therefore, it would be extremely difficult to conduct that kind of research now. That is the ideal situation however as not all countries have ethics boards to go through and who knows the ethics of war and military research.
Will it have long term implications? Everything does but it would be hard to tell what exactly those long term implications are and whether they would be major or not. In the end, I would rather go on what I know now which are the perceivable benefit as I cannot accurately define the long term implications (or think they are significant enough).
Changing the focus slightly though, would anyone think differently if it was an ancestor of yours was the one who had suffered to gain this data? Would it feel right that the head researcher (but also society) was gaining benefit from your dead relative. In other words, would your answer change if it becomes personal?
I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. ~Confucius~
- Nov 07, 2005
- Gallery
-
Quote: ==>If this data has potential to help future patients and further the advancement in medicine, do you think it's acceptable to use them given the circumstances under which they were obtained?
If these data can be helpful then they must be used no matter the circumstances under which they were gained.
I don't support the Nazis or their acts. On the contrary...I don't even want to think about them and what they put the poor Jews through....But, since what's done is done and no further harm can come out of it, I don't see any reason why they should not be used...
The sharper the knife the easier it is to dull.
The more wealth you possess the harder it is to protect.
Pride brings it's own trouble.
~Lao Tzu- Nov 07, 2005
- Gallery
-
Seriously, I'm torn on this. I...I...why do you have to pick subjects like this, eh unicorn? Seriously my head hurts.
:P :P :P j/k
Ok. Now, one issue involves whether it is ethical to use their research data (or expand on them further). AFAIK, the Nazi eugenics programs did uncover a lot a medical data. In a sense, to use it would be to condone the actions done on the victims by the Nazi. We can't condone what they did to the victims, period. To use it would be tantamount to agreeing with "the end justifies the means". We certainly wouldn't want that. Heck, any sane person regardless of race, religion or creed will agree that what the Nazi did to the victims are wrong.
OTOH, as mentioned above, what if the data could not have been obtained any other way? What if the data represents great advancement on its own in medical knowledge capable of saving lives (or potentially lots of lives if developed further) or the crucial step to the development of further advanced medical knowledge? Are we prepared to throw away such data at the risk of future patients? We can do so but what happened to the phrase "the dead shall not die in vain" or something to that effect? If we throw those data away, the victims of the experiments died for nothing.
Bottomline: "the end justifies the means" vs. "the dead shall not die in vain". Now which one prevails?
At the end of the day, I think it's how we make peace with ourselves which will saw us use the data now or eventually. Basically, it's something like "it is not the sword that is evil but the person that wields it" i.e. the ones to blame are the scientists & the methods of obtaining those data, not the data itself. Those data are knowledge, without sentience, not alive, it can't choose sides so whether it is good or evil depends on how it is used. The problem is...once we are desensitized...it may still lead us to that "the end justifies the means" path. We may have ethics in war and medical research but in the end, we're still human & there's bound to be overstepping the bounds in one way or another, except that we might not see it. IMHO, the Nazi didn't - thinking it was just a way to prove their eugenics/racial theory. It took their peers and future generations to say that what they did was horribly, horribly wrong.
- Nov 08, 2005
- Gallery
-
I agree with flyable with in order to have white you must have black like yin & yang.
yep flyable is right- Nov 08, 2005
- Gallery
-
well, everything that means science advance should be treated as improvements and benefits, the only problem is the origin of every information the nazi got. I mean, is the scource ethical? I don't think so, better to bury all that bad memories, for everyone's sake.
"Every spilled tear, feeds the roots, of a tree which the heavens will reach."
- Nov 09, 2005
- Gallery
IronSerpent
Evanescence...
-
Personally, I feel that what has been done has been done, and if it can be used to help others, then perhaps the knowledge that their suffering will help others may ease the minds or spirits of those who were the subjects of such terrible experimentations.
If I, personally, had been the subject of such "research" and it was later discarded despite the possible uses because of its immoral gain, I would be pretty upset, especially if it could ease the lives of others.However, I would still say that the methods used must be prevented in the future.
Calling a sword by a pretty name is no more than adding perfume to poison.
- Nov 10, 2005
- Gallery
-
I think Nazi's research is already outdated so why use it... Except for Cannibal Corpse music video.
- Nov 13, 2005
- Gallery
hellbomb
KaBoom!
-
if we have it, we might as well use it.
....(_)_TNT_)----#
..(_)(_)_TNT_)----#
(_)(_)(_)_TNT_)----#
"somebody set up us the bomb"
- Nov 16, 2005
- Gallery
page 2 of 3 « Previous 1 2 3 Next » 50 total items
Back to Religion & Science | Active Threads | Forum Index
Only members can post replies, please register.