The Ethics of Human Enhancement

被引:23
作者
Giubilini, Alberto [1 ]
Sanyal, Sagar [2 ]
机构
[1] Charles Sturt Univ, Ctr Appl Philosophy & Publ Eth, Canberra, ACT, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Ctr Appl Philosophy & Publ Eth, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
EUGENICS; WISDOM; LOVE;
D O I
10.1111/phc3.12208
中图分类号
B [哲学、宗教];
学科分类号
01 ; 0101 ;
摘要
Ethical debate surrounding human enhancement, especially by biotechnological means, has burgeoned since the turn of the century. Issues discussed include whether specific types of enhancement are permissible or even obligatory, whether they are likely to produce a net good for individuals and for society, and whether there is something intrinsically wrong in playing God with human nature. We characterize the main camps on the issue, identifying three main positions: permissive, restrictive and conservative positions. We present the major sub-debates and lines of argument from each camp. The review also gives a flavor of the general approach of key writers in the literature such as Julian Savulescu, Nick Bostrom, Michael Sandel, and Leon Kass.
引用
收藏
页码:233 / 243
页数:11
相关论文
共 67 条
[1]  
Agar N., 2004, LIBERAL EUGENICS DEF
[2]  
Agar Nicholas, 1998, Public Aff Q, V12, P137
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2003, THER BIOT PURS HAPP
[4]  
[Anonymous], BIOTECHNOLOGY HUMAN
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2002, HUM CLON HUM DIGN ET
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2011, ENHANCING HUMAN CAPA
[7]   CONCEPTUAL AND PRACTICAL PROBLEMS OF MORAL ENHANCEMENT [J].
Beck, Birgit .
BIOETHICS, 2015, 29 (04) :233-240
[8]   HEALTH AS A THEORETICAL CONCEPT [J].
BOORSE, C .
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 1977, 44 (04) :542-573
[9]   The fable of the dragon tyrant [J].
Bostrom, N .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2005, 31 (05) :273-277
[10]   The reversal test: Eliminating status quo bias in applied ethics [J].
Bostrom, Nick ;
Ord, Toby .
ETHICS, 2006, 116 (04) :656-679