Abstract

The article considers three independent arguments against the use of human embryos for medical purposes: the argument from the genetic criterion of humanity, the argument from the potentiality of embryos, and the argument from human nature. the author devotes the most attention to the last argument, showing that its essential point is not so much the moral status of the embryo itself, but rather the danger of the occurrence of undesirable social effects as a result of the proliferation of the use of medical techniques and therapies involving the manipulation of embryos. The conclusion of the article is that the danger referred to in the argument from human nature does not justify the eventual legal prohibition such manipulation.