Okay, I'm not sure if this thread has been started before but I searched for it and nothing came up, so I'm sorry if I'm spamming. So, lately I've been thinking a lot about the ethics of experimentation on humans and the ongoing debate about deception research.
I chose yes but I want to clarify a few things. My feeling is that, yes it is ethically acceptable, however it does depend on the type of experiment. For example, I would approve of deception in experiments such as Stanley Milgram's obedience to authority experiments. In that case, I approve of his ways because the question he was asking was worth finding an answer to (the end justifies the means) and I don't feel like he caused any significant damage or inhumanely manipulated his subjects. However, I don't support this type of experimentation if it was playing with human lives or was inhumane or non-consensual and dangerous no matter how important it was to find an answer to a scientific problem (e.g. Tuskegee syphilis experiment).
Lol I just handed an essay in on this exact same topic. No joke.
However although I agree that sometimes it is acceptable to mislead the participants, I don't think Milgram needed to breach ethics in order to get those results. I mean that's one of the main defences of his methods, that the findings could never have been gathered without him doing those things, but his study has been replicated without violating those ethics, and the findings were the same.
Of course there is the fact that no one complained, and only a small percentage regretted participating, I don't really think it negates the fact that his study was somewhat unethical and as shown, not necessary.
Although, Milgram is nowhere near as unethical as some of the other studies out there from back then. It curdles my stomach reading about them
I was also interested about what people here thought about experimentation on humans or using human bodies or human parts after the person's death without their consent, in general. For example, The Irish Giant, Charles Byrne, who despite clearly requesting and paying someone to be buried at sea instead of being studied after his death, was purchased by the owner of the Hunterian Museum where his skeleton in now up for display. One part of me finds that acceptable because I mean really the guy is dead and it's a chance to study the science of gigantism etc. But another part of me resents that idea because it was his deathbed wish and one must respect that. I don't know lol what does everyone think?
I think its totally unnacceptable tbh, I want to do with my dead body what I want to do with it. If I haven't consented then no, it shouldn't ever happen.
I mean, if somehow this became a proper part of dying, ie society is all about no consent to use a persons dead body, then why not me opening a 'whore house of the dead' for necrophiliacs? I shouldn't need permission either, if its ethically acceptable to cut up a persons dead body after their death, why can't you shag them too?
Poll
Topic: Deception research and ethics of experimentation on humans