Prompt 6
If we conclude that there is some knowledge we should not pursue on ethical grounds, how can we determine the boundaries of acceptable investigation within an area of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge
“You cannot have a boundary-less existence because your neighbor has his own boundaries, and who is going to give you the ethics between both boundaries? If there is no objective moral law, relativism will take hold, and relativism ultimately will lead to self-destruction.” – Ravi Zacharia [1]
The above quote puts into frame the entire argument of this prompt spectacularly. As humans, we need to have certain boundaries, without them there could be chaos and anarchy. While on the one hand, investigation into the unknown is at the very essence of human behavior, on the other, sentiments and beliefs founded on humanitarian and ethical grounds should be respected, and possibly be off limits (in some cases) for investigation or exploration that could have the potential to violate certain values leading to discord and disharmony and even humaneness.
Morals and ethics are heavily shaped by culture, upbringing and the insatiable need for knowledge , which make it difficult to reach a compromise in the face of disagreements between people with varying views and opinions. This discussion is a difficult yet crucial one as curiosity is human nature, as is basic human decency and respect for other peoples’ sentiments. The blurred lines between ethical and unethical practices makes it difficult to accept either theory. Through exploration of natural sciences, we will discuss here situations wherein ethical restrictions could limit the effective production of knowledge and whether the absence of it could pose more harm than good.
There is no doubt that the use of animal experimentation has taken the development of medicine to newer heights allowing humans to enjoy a better quality of life. But do the benefits to humanity outweigh the sufferings that animals go through as a result of these experiments? The use of animals in the laboratory has enabled research improving the effectiveness and safety of new drugs and their treatment modalities [2]. There are some diseases and their treatments that can only be better understood by studying cellular physiology in the body as a whole and may provide partial or unreliable information if studied on organoids or computer models. Animals like rodents, guinea pigs and chimpanzees exhibit almost 85-95% human-like cellular activity and responses. By testing drugs and procedures on animals we can identify and minimise their risks and resultant fatalities in humans. Does the above argument justify causing pain and suffering to animals when technology today has several options like sophisticated computer models, human tissue and cell cultures to study the same responses of drugs and diseases? Maybe not.
To elevate your understanding of Theory of Knowledge (TOK) and master the art of crafting insightful essays, embark on a journey of learning with our TOK essay samples. Explore expertly written examples that illuminate the complexities of knowledge questions scaffolded within the elements of TOK knowledge framework, showcasing how to effectively argue and reflect on the nature of knowledge across various Areas of Knowledge (AOKs) through the relevant use of TOK concepts.
This content is for Monthly and Annual members only.
Login Join Now
Step into a world of interactive learning where TOK, ATTL, and the IB Learner Profile come alive! Subscribe now for full access to our groundbreaking resources and join a community of educators dedicated to creating a dynamic and engaging learning environment.
