This week’s Beijing Weekend column ran under the title, "The Chinese alternative to the stem cell research debate."   It was published exactly as I wrote it – and that now requires on minor revision.  When I wrote it the US Congress had not yet passed, and President Bush had not yet vetoed, the stem cell research legislation.  The reference to both should now be stated in the past tense.  The full text is below the jump.

The Chinese alternative to the stem cell research debate

Sam Crane
China Daily, July 27, 2006

Believe
it or not, ancient Chinese philosophy can add to our understanding of
the ethics of embryonic stem cell research. Hear me out.

In the
US, debate on stem cell research centres on the question of whether
destroying an embryo is tantamount to killing an individual person.
Opponents believe that, since an embryo has the potential to become a
person, it should be treated as a person and not be subjected to
scientific experiments that might cause its destruction. Supporters
argue that embryos are not yet fully formed persons and thus can be
used to harvest stem cells for scientific study. In addition,
proponents of stem cell research would add that the social benefits of
science outweigh the destruction of individual embryos.

The US
controversy pits devout Christians, whose religious beliefs lead them
to see embryos as persons, against utilitarian liberals, whose
definition of an "individual" does not include fetuses before the third
trimester of pregnancy. The issue has become politicised of late, with
the US Congress ready to pass legislation supporting embryonic stem
cell research and the President threatening a veto.

Unsurprisingly,
the US debate has called upon various strands of Western philosophy and
religion. But Daoism and Confucianism can add something to the
conversation.

A modern-day philosophical Taoist would likely be
sceptical of the entire scientific research enterprise. The Dao De Jing
has this to say in passage 29: "Longing to take hold of all beneath
heaven and improve it; I have seen such dreams invariably fail. All
beneath heaven is a sacred vessel, something beyond improvement. Try to
improve it and you ruin it. Try to hold it and you lose it."

Religious
Daoists (dao jiao) are famous for their search for a death-defying
elixir of life. Philosophical Daoists (dao jia), however, are more
accepting of the inevitable demise of the human body. Zhuang Zi is
marvellously free of anxiety and resentment about death. Indeed, the
notion that purposive human activity can overcome the natural aging
process is contrary to the general Daoist attitude to do nothing (wu
wei) that might get in the way of Way.

If confronted with the
question of stem cell research, therefore, a philosophical Daoist might
say: "why bother?" It may help a few people with certain maladies, but
it will not fundamentally transform the human condition. Such Daoists
would generally dissent, not because embryos might be persons, but
because science cannot define destiny.

Contemporary Confucians,
on the other hand, would probably find themselves aligned with
supporters of stem cell research, but for somewhat different reasons.

For
a Confucian, persons are defined socially. Our identities are shaped
through our daily cultivation of our closest social relationships. The
question of whether an embryo is a person is, therefore, nonsensical:
how could it be a person if it was not yet actively engaged in social
relations. A person becomes a person at birth.

Furthermore, if
stem cell research helped to cure disease, allowing people to better
perform their social roles and duties, then the science would be
advancing the cause of Humanity (ren), the highest Confucian virtue.
Confucians would emphasize, even more than Western liberals, these
sorts of social benefits. It is less about individual rights and
accomplishments for a Confucian, and more about the mutual realization
of individual and social morality.

We learn more when we consider
the widest possible range of ideas in any debate. Adding Confucian and
Daoist perspectives to the American discussion of embryonic stem cell
research gives us insights into the issues, and into ourselves, that we
might otherwise overlook.