In natural law theory, how are the moral rules supposed to be discerned—
through intuition, reason, or utilitarian principles?
A scientist is conducting an experiment using one hundred adult subjects, hoping to finally discover a cure for liver cancer. Conducting
this one last study is the only way to identify the substance that can
cure the disease and save the lives of countless people. But the experiment causes long-lasting, horrible pain in the subjects, and they will not
be able to benefit in any way from the study’s success. The researcher
would ordinarily never be able to enlist any subjects for the study
because of these two facts, so to ensure the cooperation of the subjects, he lies to them: he says that being a part of the study will be
painless and that it will increase their life span. The study is completed,
the cure is found, and the subjects spend the next year in agony. What
would natural law theory say about the scientist’s actions?