Suppose a social scientist or a medical researcher justified using deception on patients or research subjects that had agreed to be part of a research effort. Suppose, further, that the researcher justified the lying, deception (maybe even harm) on the grounds that the knowledge acquired was both very impor-tant (it might save lives) and not obtainable unless the "volunteers" were deceived.

1. Suppose the "subjects" had live cancer cells implanted in them. How would you respond to the researcher?

2. Suppose people were made to feel like two cents about themselves because they did things they regretted (even at the time) but went along anyway.

3. Are there any situations in which it might be justified to lie, deceive, even harm innocent people to acquire valuable scientific knowledge? 4. What sorts of value judgments are at issue here, and how might they be justified? 5. Are the values used to defend such activities scientific or extrascien-tific? Explain.