Graduate studies at Western
Inquiry 48 (1):62 – 75 (2005)
|Abstract||Genetic engineering is often looked upon with disfavour on the grounds that it involves "tampering with nature". Most philosophers do not take this notion seriously. However, some do. Those who do tend to understand nature in an Aristotelian sense, as the essence or form which is the final end or telos for the sake of which individual organisms live, and which also explains why they are as they are. But is this really a tenable idea? In order to secure its usage in present day ethics, I will first analyze the contexts in which it is applied today, then discuss the notion of telos as it was employed by Aristotle himself, and finally debate its merits and defend it, as far as possible, against common objections.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Paul Needham (2006). Substance and Modality. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):829-840.
Jiyuan Yu (2008). The “Manifesto” of New-Confucianism and the Revival of Virtue Ethics. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (3):317-334.
Daniel P. Sulmasy (2005). “Diseases and Natural Kinds”. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (6):487-513.
Stuart Spencer, Eddy Decuypere, Stefan Aerts & Johan De Tavernier (2006). History and Ethics of Keeping Pets: Comparison with Farm Animals. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):17-25.
Tim O'Keefe (2002). The Cyrenaics on Pleasure, Happiness, and Future-Concern. Phronesis 47 (4):395-416.
Anthony Kenny (2001). Essays on the Aristotelian Tradition. Oxford University Press.
H. Verhoog (1992). The Concept of Intrinsic Value and Transgenic Animals. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):147-160.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #62,831 of 740,356 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,960 of 740,356 )
How can I increase my downloads?