David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (2):89-111 (2004)
In light of the human genome project, establishing the genetic aetiology of complex human diseases has become a research priority within Western medicine. However, in addition to the identification of disease genes, numerous research projects are also being undertaken to identify genes contributing to the development of human behavioural characteristics, such as cognitive ability and criminal tendency. The permissibility of this research is obviously controversial: will society benefit from this research, or will it adversely affect our conceptions of ourselves and each other? When assessing the permissibility of this research, it is important to consider the nature and deterministic significance of behavioural genetic information. Whilst todate there has been much discussion and debate about the properties of genetic information per se and genetic determinism, this has not been applied to behavioural genetic research and its ethical implications. Therefore, this paper elucidates how behavioural genetic information can be distinguished from other types of genetic and non-genetic information and also synthesises the determinative significance of genetic factors for the development of human behavioural traits. Undertaking this analysis enables the ethical issues raised by this research to be debated in an appropriate context and indicates that separate policy considerations are warranted.
|Keywords||behavioural genetics genetic determinism genetic information|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Angela Davey, Ainsley Newson & Peter O’Leary (2006). Communication of Genetic Information Within Families: The Case for Familial Comity. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (3):161-166.
Similar books and articles
Ludvig Beckman (2004). Are Genetic Self-Tests Dangerous? Assessing the Commercialization of Genetic Testing in Terms of Personal Autonomy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (5-6):387-398.
Neil C. Manson (2006). What is Genetic Information, and Why is It Significant? A Contextual, Contrastive, Approach. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):1-16.
Mairi Levitt & Elisa Pieri, ‘It Could Just Be an Additional Test Couldn’T It?’:Genetic Testing for Susceptibility to Aggression and Violence.
V. Launis (2000). The Use of Genetic Test Information in Insurance: The Argument From Indistinguishability Reconsidered. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (3):299-310.
E. Dye Danielle, Beverley McNamara Leanne Youngs & Peter O’Leary Jack Goldblatt (2010). The Disclosure of Genetic Information: A Human Research Ethics Perspective. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (1).
Richard A. Spinello (2004). Property Rights in Genetic Information. Ethics and Information Technology 6 (1):29-42.
Ruth Hannah Wilkinson (2010). Genetic Information: Important but Not “Exceptional. [REVIEW] Identity in the Information Society 3 (3):457-472.
Karen J. Maschke (2010). Wanted: Human Biospecimens. Hastings Center Report 40 (5):21-23.
Neil C. Manson (2006). What is Genetic Information, and Why is It Significant? A Contextual, Contrastive, Approach. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):1–16.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #164,110 of 1,725,558 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,436 of 1,725,558 )
How can I increase my downloads?