On the Sanctity of Nature

By Kaebnick, Gregory E. | The Hastings Center Report, September 2000 | Go to article overview

On the Sanctity of Nature


Kaebnick, Gregory E., The Hastings Center Report


Concerns about the sacred--common in everyday moral thinking--have crept into bioethics in various forms. Further, given a certain view of the metaphysics of morals that is now widely endorsed in Western philosophy, there is in principle no reason that judgments about the sacred cannot be part of careful and reasoned moral deliberation.

In philosophically trained circles, it is a bit gauche to describe something as sacred. To speak seriously of the sanctity of life; of humans, nature, or the natural order as being sacred or of why we ought not to "play God," is to risk appearing muddleheaded and deeply conservative. Also, one will likely be viewed as doing uniquely religious ethics, and so as offering only a sidelight that must somehow be translated into another language if it is to have any general impact. The risk is perhaps even worse in bioethics, which at least until recently has favored moral requirements whose enforcement is as straightforward and uncontestable as possible. To respect a person's wishes, maximize happiness, or ensure some kind of equality among people, we can often look to what a person has actually said about his or her wishes, what people are in general known to like, what goods others have, and so on. Of course we still run into various troubles, but we have an easier time of it than we would if we were arguing about how to respect autonomy in the way Kant had in mind. And we fare much better than we would if we were maundering on about the "sacred."

The usual philosophical attitude to the sacred comes out nicely in the President's Commission's patient but ultimately dismissive analysis of the belief that genetic engineering might amount to "playing God." In the 1982 report Splicing Life, the commission asked what the objection really means, identified a handful of interpretations, and easily dispensed with each. If the objection is simply to interfering with nature, for example, we are quickly caught in a dilemma. In one sense, all human activity interferes with nature, indeed medicine is nothing but organized interference in nature. In another sense, though, no human activity can interfere with nature; medicine adheres to the laws of physics, after all. Plainly, then, the objection must seek to make distinctions among interventions--some are laudable, some worrisome. The commission considered making a distinction by appealing to God's plan or purposes as revealed in nature, but found the appeal too raw: "some reason must be given for this judgment."[1] Finding no reason at hand, the commission set the objection aside. Years later the commission's executive director, Alexander M. Capron, wrote that one of the work's signal achievements was its ability to debunk the "playing God" objection: "By carefully dissecting the complaint that gene therapy amounted to `playing God,' the report was able to differentiate important concerns about means and consequences from rhetorical claims."[2]

The idea that genetic engineering threatens the sacred still resonates in less philosophically astute crowds, however. When President Clinton asked the National Bioethics Advisory Commission to comment on the creation of a part-cow, part-human embryo, he wrote that he was "deeply troubled" by the development, not that he was worried somebody might get hurt. There was a lurking anxiety about the very idea of chimerical embryos. Thus he asked the commission to consider "the implications of such research," not just its possible consequences, although he went on to note implicitly that truly wonderful consequences might legitimately encourage us to create and study cow-human embryos anyway.

Worries about how humans relate to their world are also involved in Jeremy Rifkin's broad assault on biotechnology. Rifkin's explicit objections underline possible horrific outcomes, but his description of biotechnology as "algeny," as an effort to change the essence of living things analogous to the alchemists' attempt to change the essence of physical things, needs no mention of consequences to work as an objection. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

On the Sanctity of Nature
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.