As science becomes more advanced, there are more concerns about the ethics of scientific experimentation, which begs the question of whether or not scientific discovery falls in line with the morals of society. The simple answer is that it does not. Unrestrained scientific exploration is unable to stay within the confines of what society considers moral. Robert Louis Stevenson’s novella Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde explores this concept through the ways Dr. Jekyll’s transformation potion affect society. The issue of how science interferes with morals is also illustrated in an article which explains the controversy surrounding the ethics of human cloning, taken from Project Muse which was published by the Johns Hopkins University Press. Science …show more content…
Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Dr. Lanyon describes the incident that drove him away from Dr. Jekyll. After the stranger, who the audience later learns is Mr. Hyde, receives the materials and mixes them together, he then tells Lanyon, “You who have so long been bound to the most narrow and material views, you who have denied the virtue of transcendental medicine, you who have derided your superiors – behold!”, before drinking the mixture and transforming into Dr. Jekyll right before his eyes (Stevenson 62). In this moment, Mr. Hyde is saying that he is superior to Lanyon because Lanyon limits himself from researching the nature of the human spirit, while Dr. Jekyll does not, causing Jekyll to be more accomplished in his scientific discoveries. However, it is clear that the discoveries that Jekyll made are terrifying to behold. For Lanyon to so suddenly learn that a trusted friend for whom he used to hold great respect was also a terrifying criminal causes him so much stress and trauma that it makes him incredibly ill and ultimately leads to his death. Even though Dr. Jekyll makes more scientific accomplishments than Lanyon, he did not necessarily do more good than Lanyon, for it was Jekyll’s greatest accomplishment that allowed Mr. Hyde to commit numerous …show more content…
Sandel explores the mindset behind the controversy surrounding human cloning and how people should approach the matter. He explains how many people consider the creation of cloned human embryos to be unethical because it would be exploitative of the embryos and because the clones have no way to consent to being born, while also keeping in mind the numerous benefits that could result from human cloning, such as helping to cure someone of disease and also bringing back children who were lost to miscarriages. Sandel closes the article by saying, “Rather than ban stem cell cloning and other forms of embryo research, we should allow it to proceed subject to regulations that embody the moral restraint appropriate to the mystery of the first stirrings of human life. Such regulations should include licensing requirements for embryo research projects and fertility clinics, restrictions on the commodification of eggs and sperm, and measures to prevent proprietary interests from monopolizing access to stem cell lines. This approach, it seems to me, offers the best hope of avoiding the wanton use of nascent human life and making these biomedical advances a blessing for health rather than an episode in the erosion of our human sensibilities” (246). Sandel is saying that while it is important to further research of humans and also provide cures for disease through human cloning, but there needs to