Stem Cells, Pluralism and Moral Empathy

  • Theo A. Boer

In discussions about the morality of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research, the focus is often on the differences. In this essay, two points are made. First, it is argued that different standpoints do not necessarily imply that altogether different values are held. Rather, shared values, including the intrinsic value of embryos (persons or not) and the value of developing medical therapies, may conflict and are weighed differently. Secondly, since we tend to forget or downplay values which we override, it is argued that we need the moral virtue of empathy. Empathy enables us to see overridden values in our own position, it fosters understanding of the weighing made by our opponents, and it stimulates the search for alternatives to Human ES-cell research which respect all values involved.

Keywords

Stem cells embryos pluralism relativism ethics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Damschen, Gregor and Schönecker, Dieter (eds.) (2003). Der moralische Status menschlicher Embryonen, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  2. Gert, Bernard (1988). Morality: A New Justification of the Moral Rules, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Hare, R.M. (1984). Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method, and Point, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Hebblethwaite, Brian (1997). Ethics and Religion in a Pluralistic Age, Edinburgh: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
  5. Kekes, John (1993). The Morality of Pluralism, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  6. De Lange, Frits (1995). “Pluralisme en christelijke traditie”, Gereformeerd Theologisch Tijdschrift, 95.3: 100–125.Google Scholar
  7. De Lange, Frits (2003). “Pal staan voor het pluralisme: pleidooi voor een casco-moraal”, Gereformeerd Theologisch Tijdschrift 103.1: 40–47.Google Scholar
  8. Oostveen, Margriet (2001). “Minister Els Borst over het tekort van de nieuwe euthanasiewet: ‘Ik kan me goed voorstellen dat artsen stervenshulp niet melden’.” NRC Handelsblad, Dutch National Evening Paper. April 14, 2001.Google Scholar
  9. Schroten, Egbert (1988). “In Statu Nascendi. De beschermwaardigheid van het menselijk embryo vanuit het gezichtspunt van de christelijke ethiek” (Inaugural address), Utrecht: Utrechtse theologische Reeks 4.Google Scholar
  10. Schroten, Egbert (2000). “Waar is dat goed voor? Een theologisch essay over wegen en grenzen in de (bio) technologie.” In: Dick G.A. Koelega and Willem B. Drees (eds.). God & co? Geloven in een technologische cultuur, Kampen: Kok Publishers, pp. 93–106.Google Scholar
  11. Wolf, Susan (1992). “Two levels of Pluralism”, Ethics 102: 785–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Theo A. Boer
    • 1
  1. 1.Protestant Theological UniversityNetherlands

Personalised recommendations