David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Bioethics 25 (4):177-184 (2011)
Prominent thinkers such as Jurgen Habermas and Michael Sandel are warning that biomedical enhancements will undermine fundamental political values. Yet whether biomedical enhancements will undermine such values depends on how biomedical enhancements will function, how they will be administered and to whom. Since only few enhancements are obtainable, it is difficult to tell whether these predictions are sound. Nevertheless, such warnings are extremely valuable. As a society we must, at the very least, be aware of developments that could have harmful consequences. Indeed, if important values were to be jeopardized, we should take appropriate measures to protect them. This paper focuses on four central values: solidarity, personal responsibility, equality and autonomy. It delineates the conditions under which biomedical enhancements would undermine these values. It also details the circumstances under which these values would be unaffected by enhancements as well as those under which they would be promoted. Specifying these conditions is valuable; it would enable society to prepare appropriate ethical guidelines and policy responses in advance.
|Keywords||biomedical enhancement equality responsibility solidarity scenario planning political values autonomy|
|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
Darian Meacham (2014). Empathy and Alteration: The Ethical Relevance of a Phenomenological Species Concept. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 39 (5):543-564.
O. Lev, B. S. Wilfond & C. M. McBride (2013). Enhancing Children Against Unhealthy Behaviors—An Ethical and Policy Assessment of Using a Nicotine Vaccine. Public Health Ethics 6 (2):197-206.
John R. Shook & James Giordano (2014). A Principled and Cosmopolitan Neuroethics: Considerations for International Relevance. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 9 (1):1.
Similar books and articles
Nicole Hassoun (2008). Nanotechnology, Enhancement, and Human Nature. NanoEthics 2 (3):289-304.
S. Matthew Liao (2005). Are 'Ex Ante' Enhancements Always Permissible? American Journal of Bioethics 5 (3):23 – 25.
Jessica Wolfendale (2008). Performance-Enhancing Technologies and Moral Responsibility in the Military. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):28 – 38.
L. E. V. Ori (2011). Will Biomedical Enhancements Undermine Solidarity, Responsibility, Equality and Autonomy? Bioethics 25 (4):177-184.
Richard Edmund Ashcroft (2008). Regulating Biomedical Enhancements in the Military. American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):47 – 49.
Darren Shickle (2000). Are “Genetic Enhancements” Really Enhancements? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9 (03):342-352.
Allen Buchanan (2008). Enhancement and the Ethics of Development. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (1):pp. 1-34.
Ori Lev, Franklin G. Miller & Ezekiel J. Emanuel (2010). The Ethics of Research on Enhancement Interventions. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20 (2):101-113.
Alex Rajczi (2008). One Danger of Biomedical Enhancements. Bioethics 22 (6):328–336.
Added to index2009-12-01
Total downloads40 ( #82,492 of 1,725,565 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #167,283 of 1,725,565 )
How can I increase my downloads?