This presentation was created for the Philippine Science High School when I was a speaker and trainer via Zoom during the PSHS System Capability Building of Values Education Teachers Conference on January 27, 2023. My invitation to conduct a seminar and service workshop on current issues in science followed my latest service as a Peace Corps Virtual Service Pilot Volunteer assisting Philippine Science High School teachers with their ongoing STEM Curriculum Revision Project, a PC Volunteer assignment lasting 23 weeks. Please visit my blog, "Anderson's Ethnographic Notes: Reflections From the Realm of Anthropology," to learn about other topics of interest to those from all disciplinary walks of life.

1. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
Philippine Science High School
Friday, January 27, 2023
Scientific Dilemmas:
Science & Ethics
1

2. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
Philippine Science High School
Friday, January 27, 2023
Scientific Dilemmas:
Science & Ethics
2

3. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
• Ph.D. Graduate Theological Foundation
Anthropology – Philosophy – Religious Studies – Indigenous Studies
• A.B.D. University of Denver & Iliff School of Theology
Anthropology – Philosophy – Religious Studies – Indigenous Studies
• M.A. Eastern New Mexico University
Anthropology – Archaeology Southwest – Quantitative Methods
• B.A. California State University Fresno
Anthropology – Archaeology – Philosophy – Religious Studies
• A.A. Fresno City College
Liberal Arts
• C.A. Fresno City College
Archaeology
Education
3

4. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
• University of New England Maine – UNE Online
Subject Matter Expert – Cultural Anthropology
Lead Instructor – Cultural Anthropology
• University of the People – Global Online
Philosophy - English
• Apprentus.com – International
ESL/English as Second Language – Conversation, Grammar
Graduate School Application - Writing & Editing
Thesis Proposal – Writing, Editing, & Defense
Tutor – Anthropology & Philosophy
Teaching - Current
4

5. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
• PSHS STEM Curriculum Revision (current)
Peace Corps Virtual Service Pilot Philippines Volunteer
• ESL Instructor – Mater Dei Institución Educativa (current)
Laureles, Medellín, Colombia
• Community Health Instructor
Peace Corps Volunteer – Cuenca, Ecuador
08/15/2017 – 03/31/2020
• Curriculum Developer – TiNi Program
Peace Corps Volunteer – Cuenca, Ecuador
01/01/2018 – 03/31/2020
Current & Recent Projects
5

6. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
• Philosophy
Introduction to Philosophy
Ethics
Ethics & Social Responsibility
Ethics of Albert Schweitzer – Reverence For Life
Western Religions
Eastern Religions
Comparative Religions
Courses Taught
6

7. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
• Anthropology
Cultural Anthropology
Cultural Anthropology for the Health Professions
Physical/Biological Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Indians of North America
Courses Taught
7

8. Douglas J. Anderson, M.A., Ph.D.
• Harvard Online
-Justice: A Review of Moral & Political Philosophy
-Bioethics: The Law, Medicine, & Ethics of Reproductive Technologies &
Genetics
• Boston University Online
-The Inclusive STEM Teaching Project
• The University of Edinburgh
-Philosophy of the Sciences: Introduction to the Philosophy of Physical
Sciences
Professional Development
8

9. Scientific Dilemmas: Science & Ethics
• What is science?
• What is the scientific method?
• What are ethics?
• What are morals?
• Case #1 – Medical Research on Animals
• Breakout sessions
• Case #2 – GMOS & Food Labeling
• Breakout sessions
• Wrapup
9

10. Scientific Dilemmas: Science & Ethics
• Understand the difference between
morality & philosophical ethics
• Introduce some major ethical theories
• Apply one or more of these theories to the
resolution of an ethical dilemma in science
• Be able to critically examine several sides
of an ongoing scientific dilemma.
10
Objectives for this Presentation

11. What is Science?
• “It is an activity, a search, and a method of
discovery that results in a body of knowledge.
Scientific investigations are based on observations.
These observations may be the results of an
experiment or simply an observation of something in
nature, like a fossil tooth. The observations that we
make must be empirical. By empirical we mean that
we must be able to experience the object of study
through our senses, although instruments, such as
a microscope or an electronic scanning device, may
be used to extend our senses” (p. 4).
• Stein, P., & Rowe, B. (2020). Physical anthropology (12th
ed.). McGraw Hill Education.
11

12. What is the Scientific Method?
• “Scientists test hypotheses in order to provide
explanations” (p. 14).
• “Explanations rely on associations and theories. An
association is an observed relationship between
variables. A theory is an explanatory framework
capable of explaining many associations” (p. 16).
• “The scientific method characterizes any [empirical]
endeavor that formulates research questions and
gathers or uses systematic data to test hypotheses”
(p. 16).
• Kottak, C. P. (2022). Cultural anthropology (19th ed.).
McGraw-Hill Education.
12

13. What is Ethics?
• What is philosophical ethics? Is it the same as
morality?
• Ethics asks questions about what we ought to do as
opposed to anthropology, for example, which simply
describes the actual practices of a people and a
culture and its beliefs about which behaviors are
good or bad. In the words of philosopher William
• Lawhead (2019), "ethics is a normative inquiry and
not a descriptive one. It seeks to establish and
prescribe norms, standards, or principles for
evaluating our actual practices" (p. 412).
• Lawhead, W. F. (2019). The philosophical journey: An
interactive approach (7th ed.). McGraw Hill Education.
13

14. What is Morality?
• So what is morality? It is understood as a set of moral
codes that people ought to follow.
• These codes can come from religions, or from
philosophical ethics, that is, ethical inquiry.
• With ethics, we strive to develop an understanding of
what constitutes the right thing to do without resorting to
any specific religion or religious code.
• Philosophical ethics is an endeavor premised upon
reason and discourse.
• Examples of moral codes based upon reason are
numerous, for example, professional societies like the
AAA (American Anthropological Association) all have a
code of ethics members are expected to adhere to and
follow.
14

15. The Beginnings of Science
• As a product of the Western philosophical method
and discourse, science is guided by philosophical
ethics premised upon reason and discourse whose
beginnings may be traced to French philosopher
René Descartes.
• His book Discourse on Method (1637), carefully
threads a path between the dogmas of the Catholic
Church, and establishes the foundations of the
modern scientific method rooted in the spirit of free
inquiry based upon reason.
• Descartes, R. (1999). Discourse on method and
meditations on first philosophy (R. A. Cress, Trans.).
Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. (Original work
published 1637)
15

16. Philosophical Ethics – What Are Our Choices?
Our theoretical choices in philosophical ethics are wide and varied, as with
all other areas of philosophy.
• Ethical relativism
• Conventional ethical relativism (Ruth Benedict – cultural relativism)
• Ethical objectivism
• Utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill)
• Kantian ethics (deontology)
• Reverence for Life (Albert Schweitzer)
• Virtue ethics (Plato)
• Feminist ethics (Sandra Harding)
• Indigenous ethics (Margaret Kovach)
16

17. Philosophical Ethics – What Are Our Choices?
• I believe that science typically faces questions and dilemmas resulting
from two major and divergent ethical theories, utilitarianism
(consequentialism) and Kant. For example, public policy
pronouncements typically appeal to “the greater good” when mandating
public health actions like vaccines where there may be some harm by
these actions. We accept such possible harmful consequences of these
mandates in the name of “the greater good for the greatest number of
people,” which is an appeal to consequentialist utilitarian theory.
• Therefore, let us examine more closely the outlines of each of these
divergent ethical theories, before moving on to consider the details of
our selected cases. 17

18. Philosophical Ethics – Utilitarianism
There exist varying formulations of utilitarianism but here is a starter from British
philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832). We call this the utilitarian calculation.
1. For each person affected by a proposed action, add up the total amount of
units of pleasure (or desirable consequences) produced and subtract from that
figure the amount of pain (or undesirable consequences) produced.
2. Merge the calculations for each individual into the sum total of pleasure and
pain produced for the community.
3. Do this calculation for alternative courses of action.
4. The morally right action is the one that produces the greatest sum total of
pleasure.
Note: We must not limit our considerations to human beings, but take into
consideration the pain of animals, the quality of sentience. 18

19. Philosophical Ethics – Utilitarianism
To help us decide what constitute the dimensions and quantities of pleasure,
Bentham devised the Hedonic Calculus, “based on assessing possible pleasures
according to their:
1. Intensity
2. Duration
3. Certainty
4. Remoteness (i.e. how far into the future the pleasure is)
5. Fecundity (how likely it is that pleasure will generate other related pleasures)
6. Purity (i.e. if any pain will be felt alongside that pleasure)
7. Extent (i.e. how many people might be able to share in that pleasure) (par. 3).”
Libretexts. (2021, April 19). 7.1.6: Hedonic calculus. Humanities LibreTexts. Retrieved January 24, 2023, from
https://human.libretexts.org/Courses/Folsom_Lake_College/PHIL_300:_Introduction_to_Philosophy_(Bauer)/07:_Ethics/7.01:_Utilitarianism/7.1.06:_Hed
onic_Calculus
19

20. Philosophical Ethics – Utilitarianism
Let’s watch the following short YouTube video.
• Utilitarianism – Philosophy Vibe
• Vibe, P. (2017, November 12). Utilitarianism [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved
January 23, 2023, from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIK3T6MRs2k&feature=youtu.be
Note: We must not limit our considerations to human beings, but take into
consideration the pain of animals, the quality of sentience.
20

21. Philosophical Ethics – Immanuel Kant
Kant’s (1724–1804) ethics eschews consequences for principles founded upon the
dignity & worth of the individual. It does not include animals as does utilitarianism.
• “Kant’s moral theory emphasizes absolute duties, motives, the dignity and worth
of persons, and a moral law that is absolute and unchanging” (Lawhead, p. 482).
• Kant stands in direct opposition to consequentialism (utilitarianism) in that he
believed “that we cannot move from a description of what is being done to any
notion of what we ought to do. A statistical survey of how people actually behave
would not tell us how we ought to behave.
• Hence, if moral principles cannot be derived from experience, then the mind
must bring its own, rational principles to the realm of moral experience” (p. 482).
• Lawhead, W. F. (2019). The Philosophical Journey: An Interactive Approach (7th
ed.). McGraw Hill Education. 21

22. Philosophical Ethics – Kant’s Categorical Imperative
Kant’s ethical theory is appealing, but complex. It must be understood in terms of
what he labels the Categorical Imperative, understood in two parts.
The Categorical Imperative I: Conformity to a Universal Law
• “Act only on that maxim whereby thou canst at the same time will that it should
become a universal law.
1. State the maxim on the basis of which you are planning to act.
2. Try to formulate your maxim in terms of a universal law.
3. See if you can consistently and rationally will that everyone follow this
universalized maxim” (Lawhead, p. 490).
• Lawhead, W. F. (2019). The Philosophical Journey: An Interactive Approach (7th
ed.). McGraw Hill Education.
22

23. Philosophical Ethics – Kant’s Categorical Imperative
The Categorical Imperative II: Persons as Ends in Themselves
• “So act as to treat humanity, whether in thine own person or in that of any other,
in every case as an end [and] never as means only (Lawhead, p. 493).”
• For Kant, “human beings have ‘an intrinsic worth’ or ‘dignity’ that makes them
valuable ‘above all price’ (Rachels & Rachels, p. 145).”
• However, contrasting with utilitarianism, Kant writes, “But so far as animals are
concerned, we have no direct duties. Animals…are there merely as means to an
end. That end is man” (Rachels & Rachels, p. 145).
• Thus, “When Kant said that human beings are valuable ‘above all price,’ this was
not mere rhetoric. Kant meant that people are irreplaceable” (Rachels, p. 145).
• Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. R. (2022). The elements of moral philosophy (10th
ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. 23

24. Philosophical Ethics – Kantian Ethics
Let’s watch the following short YouTube video.
• Kantian Ethics – Philosophy Vibe
• Vibe, P. (2017b, December 10). Kantian Ethics [Video]. YouTube.
Retrieved January 23, 2023, from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOoJ9Cq3oKM&feature=youtu.be
Note: With Kantian ethics, we do not consider any possible consequences of our
actions in determining the “right thing to do.”
24

25. Scientific Dilemmas: Medical Research on Animals
Is the use of animals in medical research warranted? We will
deliberate this question by considering two arguments
representative of utilitarianism & deontology (Kant). First
some background.
• Animal rights activists made two tests controversial: the
LD-50 tests and the Draize tests.
• LD-50 tests determine what amount of a substance will
kill 50 of 100 animals. Done routinely across species for
substances ranging from soap to chemotherapies, these
tests have been criticized as crude measures.
• Because of criticisms, since the early 1970s, use of LD-
50s declined 96 percent and has been replaced by LD-
10s.
25

26. Scientific Dilemmas: Medical Research on Animals
• The Draize test estimates whether products irritate human
eyes. Samples are dripped into rabbits’ eyes, which are
particularly sensitive.
• Activists seek alternative tests using cell cultures and
computer models.
• Over the past decades, activists and researchers agreed on
the 3R’s, made famous by researcher Barbara Orlans, of
replacement, refinement, and reduction.
• Replacement means using tissue culture instead of animal
skin, or a mouse instead of a dog.
• Refinement means improving the quality of life of research
animals, as well as the methodology.
• Reduction means reducing the number of animals used, for
example, LD-10s rather than LD-50s.
26

27. Scientific Dilemmas: Medical Research on Animals
After doing the supplied reading on Chapter 8: Medical
Research on Animals (Pence, pp. 193–211), consider the
following two arguments:
1. Peter Singer on Speciesism
2. Tom Regan on Animal rights
• Working in your assigned groups, complete the supplied
Activity I questions. Assign a spokesperson for your
group, and be prepared to share them with everyone
once the activity is complete.
27

28. Scientific Dilemmas: Medical Research on Animals
ACTIVITY I
28

29. • Born July 1946 – Melbourne, Australia
• One of the intellectual founders of the
modern animal rights movement.
• Adopted vegetarianism ~1973
• Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our
Treatment of Animals 1975
• Director Monash’s Center for Human
Bioethics in 1983 (Australia)
• Professor of Bioethics – University
Center for Human Values – Princeton
1999
29
Peter Singer on Speciesism – Our Findings

30. Singer on Speciesism – What Do We Think?
1. According to Singer, “the argument that supports equal rights for
minorities and women also supports animal rights” (p. 201). What
specific facts does he use to support this argument? Working
with your group, please list these reasons.
2. What does Singer mean when he says that “a medical
experiment using animal subjects must be speciesist”? (p. 202).
What does he mean by this term? Working with your group,
please elucidate and explain your answer.
3. Springer writes that we must consider and count the pain of
animals when performing a utilitarian calculation. Exactly how
does he talk about animal suffering when arriving at a
consequentialist conclusion on “the right thing to do” when it
comes to using animals in medical research?
4. What does Springer conclude is the right thing to do (using
consequentialist theory)? Do you agree? Are you a utilitarian?
30

31. • Born November 1938 – Pittsburgh, PA
• One of the intellectual founders of the
modern animal rights movement.
• The Case for Animal Rights 1983
• Co-Founder & Co-President – Culture &
Animals Foundation – 1985
• Developed the concept of animals being
“the subjects-of-a-life”
• Professor – North Carolina State University
– 1967 to 2001
• Directed film – We Are All Noah – 1986
31
Tom Regan on Animal Rights – Our Findings

32. Regan on Animal Rights – What Do We Think?
1. How does Regan amend the fundamental basis of Kant’s argument regarding
the inherent value of human beings? What characteristic does he specifically
say we share with animals? Working with your group, please explicate and
discuss your answer.
2. Why does Regan condemn research on animals? What does he mean when he
writes that animals “have a distinctive kind of value in their own right” (Regan, p.
203) and that this value must be respected? Working with your group, please
discuss your answer.
3. Consider the Lifeboat Test. “Only a man or a dog can remain in a lifeboat. If only
one can stay, should we draw straws to see who goes overboard” (Pence, p.
209)? Deliberate this question with your group against the backdrop of Regan’s
arguments and then write out an answer.
4. What counterarguments does the philosopher Carl Cohen make against
Regan? Can animals make claims on humans? Albert Schweitzer argues that
all life has value. With which of these philosophers do you agree?
5. Would scientists learn more if humans volunteered for tests in order to spare
animals? Would the research results not be more reliable? Discuss these
questions with your group, and then report your answers.
32

33. Scientific Dilemmas: GMOs & Food Consumption
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an animal, plant, or
microbe whose DNA has been altered using genetic engineering
or transgenic technology. This creates combinations of plant,
animal, bacterial and virus genes that do not occur in nature or
through traditional crossbreeding methods.
• Genetic modification affects many of the products we
consume on a daily basis. Examples include:
• Alfalfa, canola, corn, cotton, papaya, soy, sugar beet, yellow
summer squash, zucchini, animal products, microbes &
enzymes, and fish.
The Non-GMO Project. (2022, December 3). What is a GMO? - The
Non-GMO Project. The Non-GMO Project - Everyone Deserves an
Informed Choice. Retrieved January 25, 2023, from
https://www.nongmoproject.org/gmo-facts/what-is-gmo/
33

34. • Tolerance to atmospheric stress, such
as extreme temperatures, salinity,
drought and floods;
• Resistance to viruses, fungi and bacteria;
• Herbicide tolerance; and
• Insect resistance.
34
Scientific Dilemmas: GMOs & Food Consumption
PROS

35. 35
Scientific Dilemmas: GMOs & Food Consumption
• Proponents predict that genetic engineering would increase yields in the fields
due to the characteristics above, although this would not reach the desired level
of food security. Hunger and malnutrition are issues that often require additional
social and political strategies.
• Efforts are needed to maintain and develop varieties and cultivation methods
should be adapted to the local needs together with the local population. The only
efficient way to reduce the proportion of undernourished locally is by using
conventional means – for example by cultivating traditional food plants such as
cassava root, but also through targeted support projects, educational programs,
nutritional advice and political activities.
ProTerra Foudation. (2021, January 27). GMO and non-GMO: Pros and Cons. ProTerra Foundation. Retrieved January 25,
2023, from https://www.proterrafoundation.org/news/gmo-and-non-gmo-pros-and-cons/
PROS

36. On the other hand, the use of GMOs brings
risks, such as:
• Changes in the interaction between
plant and biotic environment:
• Persistence and invasiveness;
• Transfer of genes;
• Interactions with target organisms (e.g.
induction of resistance in pests to which
plants are resistant);
36
Scientific Dilemmas: GMOs & Food Consumption
CONS

37. 37
Scientific Dilemmas: GMOs & Food Consumption
• Interactions with non-target organisms (e.g. effects on bees and other non-pest insects, with
consequences to biodiversity);
• Interactions with the soil ecosystem with consequent biogeochemical effects.
• Changes in the interaction between plant and abiotic environment:
• Alterations in Greenhouse Gas Emissions;
• Variations in sensitivity to climatic effects;
• Modifications in sensitivity to soil abiotic factors (salinity, minerals).
• Harm to human or animal health:
• Toxicological effects;
• Allergenicity; and
• Transfer of antibiotic resistance.
ProTerra Foudation. (2021, January 27). GMO and non-GMO: Pros and Cons. ProTerra Foundation.
Retrieved January 25, 2023, from https://www.proterrafoundation.org/news/gmo-and-non-gmo-pros-and-
cons/
CONS

38. GMOs & Food Consumption – Vandana Shiva
Let’s watch the following short YouTube videos.
• Vandana Shiva on the Problem With Genetically-Modified Seeds (10:08)
• Citation: Moyers & Company. (2012, July 13). Vandana Shiva on the problem
with genetically-modified seeds [Video]. YouTube.
• Vandana Shiva on the Real Cause of Food Hunger (3:31)
• Citation: Food Farmer Earth. (2020, March 10). Vandana Shiva on the real
cause of food hunger [Video]. YouTube.
38

39. GMOS & Food Labeling – Do We Have A Right To Know?
Ethically deliberate the question of whether consumers
have a right to full disclosure about the content of their
foodstuffs, and whether they contain any GMO
products.
1) Perform a Consequentialist ethical analysis.
2) Perform a Kantian ethical analysis.
3) Report your findings.
39

40. Scientific Dilemmas: GMOs & Food Labeling
ACTIVITY II
40

41. GMOS & Food Labeling – Do We Have A Right To Know?
What have we learned? Ethically deliberate the question of
whether consumers have a right to full disclosure about the
content of their foodstuffs, and whether they contain any GMO
products.
1) Use a utilitarian ethical analysis to arrive at a conclusion to
the question. What consequentialist factors must we
consider? How do we decide questions of potential
pleasures over harms, or benefits versus costs?
2) Now take the same question and perform a Kantian ethical
analysis to arrive a conclusion for or against. Be sure to
include a consideration of both aspects of the Categorical
Imperative.
41

42. Scientific Dilemmas: Science & Ethics
42
What have we learned?
Thank You!