About this topic
Summary The concept of human biological enhancement has been used to describe the augmentation of human capacities based on some sort of biological manipulation. By and large, most philosophers work with one or the other of the following two definitions of human biological enhancement: (A) improving the well-being of persons, including the removal of disabilities defined as bio-social obstacles that reduce human well-being; (B) expanding or augmenting human capacities. These two definitions have different intentions and (arguably) different extensions since many people deny that expanding or augmenting human capacities (especially in the normal range) improves well-being and has much in common with removing disability. Some authors and authorities use "enhancement" and "therapy" as mutually excluding categories ("enhancement" being the biomedical improvement of normal or healthy human traits), others do not. Most of the arguments in this area have been initially developed within the debate on eugenics and human genetic enhancement, and some of them also belong to the broader emerging field of "neuroethics". (Hence the reader will notice a significant overlap between these phil-paper categories). Beside the genetic case, enhancement ranges from everyday cognitive stimulants (coffee), to doping in sport competitions, and off label drugs, such as methylphenidate (to prolong the attention span). Social network, education, and brain stimulation have also all been regarded as enhancements. More controversially, bioethicists have discussed "affective enhancement" (the use of oxytocin to improve relationships) and "moral enhancement", i.e. the use of all possible means (including pharmacological stimulants) to improve the moral quality of human choices. Part of the current debate elaborates the concerns of the ideology of "transhumanism" (with non strictly academic ramifications), advocating the use of biotechnology to radically transcend the present human condition.  
Key works The early literature on biological enhancement overlaps with that on eugenic selection (Savulescu 2001) and human genetic enhancement (Harris 1992Buchanan et al 2000Fukuyama 2002Habermas 2003). In the most recent literature, the ideas of moral enhancement (Douglas 2008), the relation between enhancement, Darwinian evolution, and moral status (Buchanan 2011, Douglas 2013), justice and human development (Buchanan 2008), the issue of enhancement in sport (Tamburrini & Tännsjö 2005, Miah ms) are developed further. The idea of enhancement is also used to advance the conceptual debate on disability, normal functioning, and well-being (Kahane & Savulescu 2012, Savulescu 2009, Kahane & Savulescu 2009). For a discussion of transhumanism and radical enhancement (creating abilities that do not belong to the biological repertoire of the species homo sapiens), see, respectively, Bostrom 2003, Miah 2008
Introductions Bostrom & Roache 2007 Buchanan 2009 Chadwick 2011 Miah unknown
  Show all references
Related categories
Siblings:See also:
100 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 100
  1. Keith Abney (2008). Review of ≪em>the Case Against Perfection≪/Em≫. [REVIEW] Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2 (3).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Nicholas Agar (2008). Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. John Wiley & Sons.
    In this provocative book, philosopher Nicholas Agar defends the idea that parents should be allowed to enhance their children’s characteristics.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Fritz Allhoff (2005). Germ-Line Genetic Enhancement and Rawlsian Primary Goods. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (1):39-56.
    : Genetic interventions raise a host of moral issues and, of its various species, germ-line genetic enhancement is the most morally contentious. This paper surveys various arguments against germ-line enhancement and attempts to demonstrate their inadequacies. A positive argument is advanced in favor of certain forms of germ-line enhancements, which holds that they are morally permissible if and only if they augment Rawlsian primary goods, either directly or by facilitating their acquisition.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Fritz Allhoff, Patrick Lin & Jesse Steinberg (2011). Ethics of Human Enhancement: An Executive Summary. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (2):201-212.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Jonny Anomaly, Public Goods and Procreation.
    Procreation is the ultimate public goods problem. Each new child affects the welfare of many other people, and some (but not all) children produce uncompensated value that future people will enjoy. This essay addresses challenges that arise if we think of procreation and parenting as public goods. These include whether private choices are likely to lead to a socially desirable outcome, and whether changes in laws, social norms, or access to genetic engineering and embryo selection might improve the aggregate outcome (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Jonny Anomaly (2013). Review of Michael Hauskeller, Better Humans? Understanding the Enhancement Project. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Jonny Anomaly (2012). Review of Allen Buchanan, Beyond Humanity? The Ethics of Biomedical Enhancement. [REVIEW] Bioethics 26 (7):391-392.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Nick Bostrom (2003). Human Genetic Enhancements: A Transhumanist Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (4):493-506.
    Transhumanism is a loosely defined movement that has developed gradually over the past two decades. It promotes an interdisciplinary approach to understanding and evaluating the opportunities for enhancing the human condition and the human organism opened up by the advancement of technology. Attention is given to both present technologies, like genetic engineering and information technology, and anticipated future ones, such as molecular nanotechnology and artificial intelligence.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Nick Bostrom & Rebecca Roache (2007). Ethical Issues in Human Enhancement. In J. Ryberg, T. Petersen & C. Wolf (eds.), New Waves in Applied Ethics. Palgrave Macmillan. 120--152.
    Human enhancement has emerged in recent years as a blossoming topic in applied ethics. With continuing advances in science and technology, people are beginning to realize that some of the basic parameters of the human condition might be changed in the future. One important way in which the human condition could be changed is through the enhancement of basic human capacities. If this becomes feasible within the lifespan of many people alive today, then it is important now to consider the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Nick Bostrom & Anders Sandberg (2009). The Wisdom of Nature: An Evolutionary Heuristic for Human Enhancement. In Julian Savulescu & Nick Bostrom (eds.), Human Enhancement. Oup Oxford. 375--416.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Nick Bostrom & Julian Savulescu (2009). Human Enhancement Ethics: The State of the Debate. In . Oxford University Press. 1--22.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Iain Brassington (2010). Enhancing Evolution and "Enhancing Evolution&Quot;. Bioethics 24 (8):395-402.
    It has been claimed in several places that the new genetic technologies allow humanity to achieve in a generation or two what might take natural selection hundreds of millennia in respect of the elimination of certain diseases and an increase in traits such as intelligence. More radically, it has been suggested that those same technologies could be used to instil characteristics that we might reasonably expect never to appear due to natural selection alone. John Harris, a proponent of this genomic (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Allen Buchanan (2009). Human Nature and Enhancement. Bioethics 23 (3):141-150.
    Appeals to the idea of human nature are frequent in the voluminous literature on the ethics of enhancing human beings through biotechnology. Two chief concerns about the impact of enhancements on human nature have been voiced. The first is that enhancement may alter or destroy human nature. The second is that if enhancement alters or destroys human nature, this will undercut our ability to ascertain the good because, for us, the good is determined by our nature. The first concern assumes (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Allen Buchanan (2008). Enhancement and the Ethics of Development. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (1):pp. 1-34.
    Much of the debate about the ethics of enhancement has proceeded according to two framing assumptions. The first is that although enhancement carries large social risks, the chief benefits of enhancement are to those who are enhanced (or their parents, in the case of enhancing the traits of children). The second is that, because we now understand the wrongs of state-driven eugenics, enhancements, at least in liberal societies, will be personal goods, chosen or not chosen in a market for enhancement (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Allen E. Buchanan (2011). Beyond Humanity?: The Ethics of Biomedical Enhancement. Oxford University Press.
    In Beyond Humanity a leading philosopher offers a powerful and controversial exploration of urgent ethical issues concerning human enhancement.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Ruth Chadwick (2011). Enhancements: Improvements for Whom? Bioethics 25 (4):ii-ii.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Sarah Chan & John Harris (2007). In Support of Human Enhancement. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Stephen R. L. Clark (1995). How to Live Forever: Science Fiction and Philosophy. Routledge.
    Immortality has long preoccupied everyone from alchemists to science fiction writers. In this intriguing investigation, Stephen Clark contends that the genre of science fiction writing enables the investigation of philosophical questions about immortality without the constraints of academic philosophy. He shows how fantasy accounts of phenomena such as resurrection, outer body experience, reincarnation or life extending medicines can be related to philosophy in interesting ways. Reading Western myths such as that of vampire, he examines the ways fear and hopes of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Mark Coeckelbergh (2011). Human Development or Human Enhancement? A Methodological Reflection on Capabilities and the Evaluation of Information Technologies. Ethics and Information Technology 13 (2):81-92.
    Nussbaum’s version of the capability approach is not only a helpful approach to development problems but can also be employed as a general ethical-anthropological framework in ‘advanced’ societies. This paper explores its normative force for evaluating information technologies, with a particular focus on the issue of human enhancement. It suggests that the capability approach can be a useful way of to specify a workable and adequate level of analysis in human enhancement discussions, but argues that any interpretation of what these (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. G. K. D. Crozier & Christopher Hajzler (2010). Market Stimulus and Genomic Justice: Evaluating the Effects of Market Access to Human Germ-Line Enhancement. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20 (2):161-179.
    In the debates surrounding the ethical dimensions of interventions in the human genome, much attention is paid to determining whether—and if so, how—market access to these technologies ought to be managed in order to maximize social benefit. There are those who advocate a “laissez-faire” free-market approach to the development and use of genetic and genomic interventions. We are sympathetic to this view insofar as we understand the workings of the market stimulus effect. We use the term “market stimulus effect” to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Anthony Mark Cutter & Bert Gordijn (2007). Questions of Human Enhancement: An Editorial. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Norman Daniels (2000). Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9 (03):309--322.
    The treatment-enhancement distinction draws a line between services or interventions meant to prevent or cure (or otherwise ameliorate) conditions that we view as diseases or disabilities and interventions that improve a condition that we view as a normal function or feature of members of our species. The line drawn here is widely appealed to in medical practice and medical insurance contexts, as well as in our everyday thinking about the medical services we do and should assist people in obtaining.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Aubrey de Grey (2003). Fear of Misrepresentation Cannot Justify Silence About Foreseeable Life-Extension Biotechnology. Bioessays 25 (1):94-95.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Inmaculada de Melo-Martin & Arleen Salles (forthcoming). Moral Bioenhancement: Much Ado About Nothing? Bioethics.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. D. DeGrazia (2014). Moral Enhancement, Freedom, and What We (Should) Value in Moral Behaviour. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (6):361-368.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Candice Delmas (2012). Enhancing Human Capacities – Edited by J. Savulescu, R. Ter Meulen & G. Kahane. [REVIEW] Journal of Applied Philosophy 29 (2):162-165.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Thomas Douglas (2014). Enhancing Moral Conformity and Enhancing Moral Worth. Neuroethics 7 (1):75-91.
    It is plausible that we have moral reasons to become better at conforming to our moral reasons. However, it is not always clear what means to greater moral conformity we should adopt. John Harris has recently argued that we have reason to adopt traditional, deliberative means in preference to means that alter our affective or conative states directly—that is, without engaging our deliberative faculties. One of Harris’ concerns about direct means is that they would produce only a superficial kind of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Thomas Douglas (2013). Human Enhancement and Supra-Personal Moral Status. Philosophical Studies 162 (3):473-497.
    Several authors have speculated that (1) the pharmaceutical, genetic or other technological enhancement of human mental capacities could result in the creation of beings with greater moral status than persons, and (2) the creation of such beings would harm ordinary, unenhanced humans, perhaps by reducing their immunity to permissible harm. These claims have been taken to ground moral objections to the unrestrained pursuit of human enhancement. In recent work, Allen Buchanan responds to these objections by questioning both (1) and (2). (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Thomas Douglas (2013). Moral Enhancement Via Direct Emotion Modulation: A Reply to John Harris. Bioethics 27 (3):160-168.
    Some argue that humans should enhance their moral capacities by adopting institutions that facilitate morally good motives and behaviour. I have defended a parallel claim: that we could permissibly use biomedical technologies to enhance our moral capacities, for example by attenuating certain counter-moral emotions. John Harris has recently responded to my argument by raising three concerns about the direct modulation of emotions as a means to moral enhancement. He argues (1) that such means will be relatively ineffective in bringing about (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Thomas Douglas (2008). Moral Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.
    Opponents of biomedical enhancement often claim that, even if such enhancement would benefit the enhanced, it would harm others. But this objection looks unpersuasive when the enhancement in question is a moral enhancement — an enhancement that will expectably leave the enhanced person with morally better motives than she had previously. In this article I (1) describe one type of psychological alteration that would plausibly qualify as a moral enhancement, (2) argue that we will, in the medium-term future, probably be (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Thomas Douglas (2007). Enhancement in Sport, and Enhancement Outside Sport. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Hans-Joerg Ehni & Diana Aurenque (2012). On Moral Enhancement From a Habermasian Perspective. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (02):223-234.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Colin Farrelly, Preparing for Our Enhanced Future.
    (forthcoming) Journal of Medical Licensure and Discipline. Rapid advances in human genetics raise the prospect that one day we may be able to develop genetic enhancements to promote a diverse range of phenotypes (e.g. health, intelligence, behaviour, etc.). Perhaps the biggest challenge that genetic enhancements pose for medical practitioners is that they will compel us to re-think a good deal of the conventional wisdom of the status quo. Radical enhancements are likely to have this affect for a variety of reasons. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Colin Farrelly (2010). Equality and the Duty to Retard Human Ageing. Bioethics 24 (8):384-394.
    Where does the aspiration to retard human ageing fit in the ‘big picture’ of medical necessities and the requirements of just healthcare? Is there a duty to retard human ageing? And if so, how much should we invest in the basic science that studies the biology of ageing and could lead to interventions that modify the biological processes of human ageing? I consider two prominent accounts of equality and just healthcare – Norman Daniels's application of the principle of fair equality (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Colin Farrelly (2004). Genes and Equality. Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (6):587-592.
    What we think about equality as a value will influence how we think genetic interventions should be regulated. In this paper I utilise the taxonomy of equality put forth by Derek Parfit and apply this to the issue of genetic interventions. I argue that Telic Egalitarianism is untenable and that Deontic Egalitarianism collapses into the Priority View. The Priority View maintains that it is morally more important to benefit those who are worse off. Once this precision has been given to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Colin Farrelly (2002). Genes and Social Justice: A Rawlsian Reply to Moore. Bioethics 16 (1):72–83.
    In this article I critically examine Adam Moore’s claim that the threshold for overriding intangible property rights and privacy rights is higher, in relation to genetic enhancement techniques and sensitive personal information, than is commonly suggested. I argue that Moore fails to see how important advances in genetic research are to social justice. Once this point is emphasised one sees that the issue of how formidable overriding these rights are is open to much debate. There are strong reasons, on grounds (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Halley S. Faust (2008). Should We Select for Genetic Moral Enhancement? A Thought Experiment Using the Moralkinder (Mk+) Haplotype. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (6):397-416.
    By using preimplantation haplotype diagnosis, prospective parents are able to select embryos to implant through in vitro fertilization. If we knew that the naturally-occurring (but theoretical) MoralKinder (MK+) haplotype would predispose individuals to a higher level of morality than average, is it permissible or obligatory to select for the MK+ haplotype? I.e., is it moral to select for morality? This paper explores the various potential issues that could arise from genetic moral enhancement.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Oliver Feeney (2010). Germ-Line Enhancements, Inequalities and the (In)Egalitarian Ethos. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (2).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Francis Fukuyama (2002). 'Our Posthuman Future': Biotechnology as a Threat to Human Nature. fsgbooks.
    In a sense, all technology is biotechnology: machines interacting with human organisms. Technology is designed to overcome the frailties and limitations of human beings in a state of nature -- to make us faster, stronger, longer-lived, smarter, happier. And all technology raises questions about its real contribution to human welfare: are our lives really better for the existence of the automobile, television, nuclear power? These questions are ethical and political, as well as medical; and they even reach to the philosophical (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Jonathan Glover (2008). Choosing Children: Genes, Disability, and Design. OUP Oxford.
    Progress in genetic and reproductive technology now offers us the possibility of choosing what kinds of children we do and don't have. Should we welcome this power, or should we fear its implications? There is no ethical question more urgent than this: we may be at a turning-point in the history of humanity. The renowned moral philosopher and best-selling author Jonathan Glover shows us how we might try to answer this question, and other provoking and disturbing questions to which it (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Henry Greely, Barbara Sahakian, John Harris, Ronald Kessler, Gazzaniga C., Campbell Michael, Farah Philip & J. Martha (2008). Towards Responsible Use of Cognitive-Enhancing Drugs by the Healthy. 456 (7223):702--705.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. John Harris (2013). Moral Progress and Moral Enhancement. Bioethics 27 (5):285-290.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. John Harris (2013). 'Ethics is for Bad Guys!' Putting the 'Moral' Into Moral Enhancement. Bioethics 27 (3):169-173.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. John Harris (2011). Moral Enhancement and Freedom. Bioethics 25 (2):102-111.
    This paper identifies human enhancement as one of the most significant areas of bioethical interest in the last twenty years. It discusses in more detail one area, namely moral enhancement, which is generating significant contemporary interest. The author argues that so far from being susceptible to new forms of high tech manipulation, either genetic, chemical, surgical or neurological, the only reliable methods of moral enhancement, either now or for the foreseeable future, are either those that have been in human and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Nils Holtug (2011). Equality and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction. Bioethics 25 (3):137-144.
    In From Chance to Choice, Allen Buchanan, Dan Brock, Norman Daniels and Daniel Wikler propose a new way of defending the moral significance of the distinction between genetic treatments and enhancements. They develop what they call a ‘normal function model’ of equality of opportunity and argue that it offers a ‘limited’ defence of this distinction. In this article, I critically assess their model and the support it (allegedly) provides for the treatment-enhancement distinction. First, I argue that there is a troubling (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Tvrtko Jolic (2014). Climate Change and Human Moral Enhancement. In Mladen Domazet & Dinka Marinovic Jerolimov (eds.), Sustainability Perspectives from the European Semi-periphery. Institute for social research. 79-91.
    In this article I discuss a recent proposal according to which human beings are in need of moral enhancement by novel biomedical means in order to reduce the risk of catastrophes that could threaten the very possibility of continued human existence on this planet. I raise two objections to this proposal. The first objection claims that the idea that human beings could be morally enhanced by altering our emotional psychological inclinations, such as altruism, is misguided. In the line with Kantian (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. R. Joyce (2013). Unfit for the Future: The Need for Moral EnhancementBy Ingmar Persson And Julian Savulescu. Analysis 73 (3):587-589.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Eric T. Juengst (1997). Can Enhancement Be Distinguished From Prevention in Genetic Medicine? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 22 (2):125-142.
    In discussions of the ethics of human gene therapy, it has become standard to draw a distinction between the use of human gene transfer techniques to treat health problems and their use to enhance or improve normal human traits. Some dispute the normative force of this distinction by arguing that it is undercut by the legitimate medical use of human gene transfer techniques to prevent disease - such as genetic engineering to bolster immune function, improve the efficiency of DNA repair, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Guy Kahane (2011). Mastery Without Mystery: Why There is No Promethean Sin in Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (4):355-368.
    Several authors have suggested that we cannot fully grapple with the ethics of human enhancement unless we address neglected questions about our place in the world, questions that verge on theology but can be pursued independently of religion. A prominent example is Michael Sandel, who argues that the deepest objection to enhancement is that it expresses a Promethean drive to mastery which deprives us of openness to the unbidden and leaves us with nothing to affirm outside our own wills. Sandel's (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Leon Kass (2002). Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics. Encounter Books.
    We are walking too quickly down the road to physical and psychological utopia without pausing to assess the potential damage to our humanity from this brave new ...
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 100