Terminator technology as an ethical issue in business - Essay Example

?Terminator Technology as an Ethical Issue in Business Introduction The word ethics can be understood as a set of rules of behaviour. Ethics form thefundamental basic concepts of human conduct of what is wrong or right, acceptable or not. It encompasses universal values such as equality for all humanity, natural rights, maintaining the rule of the land, alarm for health and safety measures, and safety for the natural environment. Therefore, the standards govern the relationship between people for a mutual benefit for all parties concerned. Terminator technologies are a form of organic patenting (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:20). Organic patenting is an issue of ethical concern in the world today. The idea of organic patenting has received conflicting discussion all over and has generated an emotional theme. The point of contention being whether it should be accepted or rejected. The subsequent discuss has further picked on the ethical concerns associated with this practice in regards to addressing the law of natural order. Organic patenting involves the law of giving the rights of an organism to a particular party, organisation or a person (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:27). The concept of terminator technology, therefore, as a form of organic patenting is a technology designed to genetically alter a plant’s capacity to germinate a second time. The motive behind this business idea is to force farmers to purchase fresh supply of seeds. Thus, the terminator technology is a patent given to corporations to protect them from unscrupulous farmers. The control of seed technology prevents the growers from pirating based on the premise that if crops remain fertile farmers may use the transgenic seed from previous season. By farmers using these seeds, then they lower the profits of the companies owing to reduced sales. The ethical issue in this discussion is the traditional rights of the farmers, and the companies’ rights of patenting (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:20). Discussion This paper seeks to unveil the controversial theme of terminator technology in terms of the environmental disasters, and the effects of seeds patenting by companies on farmers. From the ethical point of view, this paper shall discuss those affected by this technology, those who bear the greatest responsibility, and the aspect of the situation that violates the rules of conduct, as to what constitutes good or bad (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:35). Terminator technology is presently the greatest danger to humanity. If this technology is used in large scale in the world today, it poses a huge threat; it will entirely lead to the disaster of famine and starvation for humankind on a worldwide scale. Farmers who store seeds that they harvest, and plant them in the following season support more than half of the world population. This, therefore, means that seeds are planted and then harvested. In addition, the seeds are harvested and then replanted. Many farmers face the problem of buying seeds every season. Therefore, harvesting and replanting seeds becomes a significant aspect of the farming process. If terminator technology is the way to go, then farmers have to pay for seeds every other season. Apart from the danger of famine and starvation to huge populations terminator technology poses another disaster: It spells a significant contribution to the deterioration of health and the environment. This is probably to affect hundreds of scores around the world. The effects of terminator technology as a form of seed patenting to farmers are far reaching. Seed patenting on farmers causes a lot of concern because the wellbeing of a majority of the world populace may end up with food insecurity. In a country like India, poorer farmers have even committed suicide. This type of technology is also feared to force poor farmers to be more dependent. In addition, patent holders may manipulate the available supplies with intent to drive seeds’ market prices. This is likely to alter the resources available to the farmers and render them helpless. It is will also lead to farmers being tried for cross-pollination in the effort to gain cheaper seeds. The most affected within the bounds of technology are farmers. They are, in most cases, forced to take up decisions that they do not have control over. The high prices and high financial obligation of buying seeds every year affect the agricultural patterns. Those who bear the highest responsibility are the patent owners. They manipulate and exploit farmers in order to ensure high profits. These companies have perfected the art of seed supply in the agricultural sector. Having looked at the above factors, considering the ethical issues of seed terminator technology becomes quite critical. Seed patenting and food security, especially in the third world countries, are under threat. The ethics of the mode of seed production raises eyebrows. Food production under the umbrella of patented technologies for preventing plants from generating fertile seeds sets a hot discussion for ethical issues. Architects of this technology argue that it is a step towards improved and quality seeds. On the contrary, critics question the integrity of the basis behind the technology. They argue that this technology endangers biodiversity and the wellbeing of the people. This is because majority of people in the world today depend mostly on the farm-saved seeds. In support of this technology, proponents argue that it is a set of interacting genetic elements which allow a controlled practice of value-added quality of seed viability in the plant. That given this technology, it is possible to plant crops that are viable once sold to the farmers. An ethical concern is whether the farmers would be able to maintain their own stock, given the complexity of this technology. The answer is a resounding no because the farmers would then be forced to rely solely on these companies. These corporations allow genetic engineering of crops that is designed to destroy seeds if there is a trial to plant them the second time. Therefore, the ethical issues involved in the application of seed terminator technology comprises of the violation of the natural organism’s inherent values. In terms of the intrinsic nature of an organism, it is unethical to alter its genetic make-up. It is not proper, in any way, to manipulate its natural value for the purposes of commercial advantage or any other reason. Tampering with nature through mixing of genes in organisms, and domination of the supply of food by few companies is simply selfish. It is ethical to perceive that since organisms are capable of producing, mutating and moving on their own within the environment, they as well have the power of genetic alignment without external influence. Thus, any slight alteration of their natural setting violates the balance of normal development (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:148). There is also a mounting argument to seed terminator technology among various environmental groups. They pose the ethical concern that this technology amounts to an absolute obstruction of crop breeding. These groups hold that the only purpose of these companies is to secure and protect huge profits. It kills the capacity of the seeds to germinate, which leads to a fundamental offense against nature and the human race. Critics base their arguments on moral bearing of this technology (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:398). The moral standing and concern of the crime is whether to destroy seeds in order to create a monopoly market for either the government, company, or an individual. Another ethical concern based on this question is whether a responsible state can encourage this technology that enslaves its citizenry. How Terminator Technology Violates Deontology Principles Deontology principles categorise actions as moral or immoral depending on whether the companies involved follow their obligations. Terminator technology as a form of organic patenting violates deontological principles because it threatens the life of both current and future generations. Companies are considered immoral if they contribute to damages without adhering to their moral duties. Additionally, activities that contribute to mass suffering are morally wrong since they do not respect the rights of humanity. Causing seeds not to germinate entails curtailing the right of these organisms. Therefore, companies that practice seed termination violate deontological principles. Deontological principles require that responsible organs show respect for human life at all cost. The scope and application of these principles should follow strict observance (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:425). Owing to the impacts of seed termination businesses and other responsible parties are required to work together with their governments towards reducing human suffering and poverty. According to deontology principles it is unethical for companies to block governments from implementing activities aimed at reducing the negative impacts of their technologies. According to views by deontologists, it is crucial that companies take responsibility of their actions and avoid causing injuries to fellow institutions and individuals. Since the outcomes of terminator affect vulnerable individuals or groups all activities resulting from this practice, such as famine and deaths, are unethically and violate deontological principles. Companies contributing to food shortages and hunger should be viewed as deliberately victimising vulnerable individuals, and this is morally wrong. Solutions in Accordance with Deontological Framework Different companies contribute differently towards the welfare of farmers in the production of seeds for the purposes of making profits. Deontology framework is thus an appropriate way of objectively analysing the effects generated by termination seeds. Deontological principles require that companies share the burden and costs of the outcome of their activities. On the contrary, it does not make sense to equally share the consequences of seed terminating with farmers, instead, farmers must be compensated for the damages sustained. Companies responsible for damages should be accountable, and governments should endeavour to mitigate the adverse effects of such technologies. In addition, companies that carry out activities that cause ecological damage should come up with ways of restoring the ecosystem. Companies should aim at taking moral responsibility of their actions. By doing this, the problems of food shortage, famine and high seed prices would be reduced (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:576). How Seed Terminator Technology Violates Social Justice Principles For many years, the traditional production of seeds for planting has benefited farmers. The present prevention of seeds from germinating with aims to protect company ownership has generated spirited debates. The issue on the moral and ethical concern has been at the centre of these debates. This, therefore, forms the basis for social justice to those who bear the greatest burden. Social justice needs to be enhanced and those companies responsible need to devise ways of mitigation, and take responsibility to reduce the negative effects. Seed termination should be considered as a vice, and the resulting actions should not be political. Any attempt to adversely affect or deteriorate human life is mere injustice. The dawn of organism patenting in the world has unleashed human suffering and lowered the value of life. Alteration of the intrinsic value of nature is a total violation of fundamental rights of the dependants of nature. To ensure justice for all, such activities leading to suffering must be highly condemned. The adverse effects associated with this technology should be mitigated, and put to a halt. Since different economies in the world face varying consequences of human injustices from famine and food shortage, governments should, therefore, in the strongest terms stop this technology. Wealthy and industrialised nations have contributed to the problems faced by many poor nations. Social justice thus requires owning up and developing corrective measures. Since organic patenting affects several aspects of human life seed termination threatens even the basic aspects of human life. Solutions in Accordance with Social Justice Framework According to the precepts of social justice, governments of developed world must play a centre role in mitigating the effects of terminator technology as this is where most of such companies base their operations. Moreover, they should participate in the creation of alternative methods of food production in order to help farmers. Taking feasible actions intended for improving human dignity would be highest law according the laws of social justice. Mutual obligation by all participants is be the principle through which human injustice will be reduced (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:758). How Terminator Technology Violates Teleological Principles People usually ponder about the nature of morality. In the attempts to answer this question teleological principles have been used. Teleological principles locate the issue of moral goodness in the repercussions of human individual behaviour, and not the behaviour itself. According to these principles, human actions are teleological in the ways they reason and meet their ends. When the human consequences of their behaviour lead to the greatest good for all, then it is said that the principles of teleology have been practiced. In the face of seed termination technology and organism patents, these principles are often broken. By preventing the germination of seeds through this technology, the laws of nature are undermined. Through the companies obtaining ownership to patents and rights to seeds farmers’ capacity to grow crops is hampered (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:138). Monopolising the production of seeds translates to high likelihood of perpetual price increments, and the ones who bear the burden are the farmers. Farmers having been denied their right to traditionally produce seeds find it expensive to buy seeds. The resulting effect of this is the creation of food shortages since fewer farmers would be willing to plant. This leads to famine and suffering, notwithstanding poverty and inability to desirable living standards. Subsequently, there is no goodness in this consequence as this leads to the violation of fundamental principles of teleology (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:356). Solutions in Accordance with Teleological Framework According to the teleological principles, the solutions to the problems caused by human behaviour should only be solved through the application of the rules of morality. The founding principles of teleological framework should be given priority. This means that companies should strive to do what is good at all times. To ensure absolute good for all humanity, individual rights and dignity of human life must take precedence. Actions by terminator companies to protect and prevent seed germination lead to undermining of human life. Stopping these atrocities to the farmers and the population is in line with the principles of teleological framework (Jeurissen and Rijst, 2007:408). Recommendations One of the recommendations to the issue of morality in the field of organism patenting is that contributing companies should uphold human dignity. Improving the quality of life and sustainability of human health should be the driving force for any undertaking. Terminator technologies aimed at preventing the viability of seeds should not be encouraged. Famers should also be given alternatives in crop production. Governments should take equal efforts in the fight against human rights violation by these terminator technologies. Good living conditions should take lead in order to fulfil and meet the fundamental principles of nature and decent human life. Conclusion In conclusion, the basis of human goodness and quality of life should be founded on the principles of the moral requirements. The business environment in today’s setting cannot survive without giving critical focus on honesty, quality of life and proper business ethics. Governments in various countries should not only rely on the principles of equality and quality of life, but also combined efforts to design meaningful, effective and mutual participation. Terminator seed technology would lead to undesirable consequences on farmers and entire populations and the development of crop genetic aspects. Traditional seed production may disappear and become genetically contaminated, but the technology applied should be based on sustainable environmental practices. Businesspersons must display moral duty to ensure that the planet is left in a better state than was found. Reference Jeurissen, R. & Rijst, M. (2007) Ethics & business, Assen, Koninklijke Van Gorcum, vol. 1. Read More