A specific example of what im reffering to is Joseph Mengele, the infamous nazi “scientist” that would experiment on countless holocaust victims and had a special fixation for twins.
Mengele was reported to have conducted brutal experiments that include: injecting chemicals into the eyes of his patients in order to try to change there color, trying to create artificially conjoined twins by bt sewing young children together back to back and removing the limbs of his patients (for what exact purpose I do not know).
These specific experiments did not produce interesting results of any scientific value. However, I’ve also heard that much of Dr.Mengele’s work was destroyed soon after WWII ended (or as it was ending) and thus many of the experiments he conducted, and the results they yielded were lost.
Here comes my question: Had Mengele (or any other scientist that has gained information in a non-moral way) made an interesting scientific discovery, would it be okay to use that information? Is it okay to use information aquired in a non moral way?
One has to take into consideration, that although the information was acquired via a very brutal and violent way (one cannot deny this), the results might be astonishing.
Yes, one would not conduct such horrible experiments, but perhaps there is information that can only be aquired in such horrible experiments.
Would it be okay to lose, or ignore this valuable information, because it was obtained in immoral experiments?
(For discussions sake, when answering this question, try to imagine that the result of such an experiment is truly amazing)
P.S: I mean no offense in mentioning Mengele and the experiments he did. I am simply mentioning a person that I know that conducted experiments in a immoral way.
I don’t like the use of ‘moral’ - so I’ve mentally substituted ‘ethical’
What is done, is done, using the information makes no difference to the past, but will by your carefully spelled out assumptions, be beneficial in the future.
Since my ethics encompass trying to make things less unpleasant for people, I would consider it highly unethical not to use the information.
I would be slightly nervous that this would encourage others to conduct disgusting experiments in the hope that they would get a ‘Get out of jail free’ card if they hit the scientific jackpot
but I am sufficiently realistic to be aware that the ‘others’ would need no encouragement.
I consider this question to be related to the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine (which I hold to be wrong).
IMHO, once a deed is done, its results should not be neglected. So, the results should definitely be used. OTOH, the offending party (be it an unethical scientist or a bad cop) should be punished just the same, regardless of the results.
Much medical knowledge has been acquired in patently immoral ways. The southern US doctor who developed the Caeserian Section in the 1800s practiced it hundreds of times on pregnant slaves before he perfected the technique. I believe the data appalingly acquired by the Tuskegee Syhilis Study (wherein black men coming in to be treated for syphilis were unwittingly used as a control group, to see what happens when syphilis goes untreated. This program began in the 30s and continued until 1972!) are still in use.
You don’t have to stamp a swastika on research to call it “immoral.”
Do say more, if you have a point. Or was this another borderline non-sequitor drive-by post?
I agree that the knowledge itself is ethically neutral, and if it can be put to good use, it should. However, I think that of course we should use peer and outside monitoring to minimize or eradicate unethical research (including wire taps and torture), and should punish those guilty of such research very, very harshly to minimize copycats and unethical researchers. Such punishment should certainly include jail time. Furthermore, they should never, ever see a dollar of profit from their research, nor should any government, school or private company which funded them.
Krokodil, thank you for some other examples. I in no way took the OP to be saying that *only *the Nazis ever engaged in horrific and unethical research, but it’s nice to have some further examples, and ones which we know actually did produce information which is beneficial to mankind.
I would consider it ethical to use the results of unethical research, if important data is gained. Just as another example, a lot of psychological knowledge is founded in procedures which would nowadays end in a criminal sentence.
The problem then is; what’s stopping everyone from just doing unethical experiments all the time? There’s a lot we could learn from methods that have been banned - how do we stop people from ignoring the ban?
The answer is, of course, tough punishments, irregardless of the worth of the data. Sentences that are given without any kind of lessening because the results are useful.
So yes, i’d find it moral to use Megele’s research, had it turned up anything of merit (assuming it used scientific methods, which in real life he did not). In fact, i’d find it unethical to not use that data.
When I first heard abut this dilemma, using Mengele’s research in particular, the article specifically mentioned data on the upper limits of human survivability of temperature extremes, which is potentially useful information. He’s more famous for dead-end research on turning brown eyes into blue eyes, but not all of it was that dubious.
Should we use the results? Tough call. I’d say it boils down to (a) how badly do we need the data? (b) are there more legitimate, reliable and ethical ways to gather the same data? It boils down to a case-by-case consideration.
The ‘illegal wire tap’ stuff strikes me as a bit daft
they are not physically damaging anyone
Torture strikes me as pretty pointless, I’ll concede that there are certain circumstances where it might work - but I reckon it is generally unreliable.
@Digglepop
The people who feel that Stem Cell research is wrong are a bit daft
a) it hurts no one
b) it will happen anyway
Humans are avid tinkerers, one can at best, keep an eye on them
Sure, use the information. Why not? Who does it hurt?
In the specific case of the Nazis, they were piss-poor scientists who performed experiments of dubious value and fudged the results to please the higher-ups, so their results are useless. But if their “only” flaw had been their total disregard for human pain and suffering, then sure, by all means use it. We’ll probably never get a chance to get that information again.
Not a stretch. Illegal wire taps is by definition collecting info in an illegal way. Illegal=immoral. Government going against it’s own laws to tap it’s own citizens.To me this is big.
I mostly agree about torture. The tortured will say anything to make the pain go away.