David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (2):77-78 (2013)
I shall discuss only one of Nicholas Agar's main claims,1 namely ‘that the bad consequences/of moral status enhancement/are, in moral terms, so bad that a moderate probability of their occurrence makes it wrong not to seek to prevent them’. His other main claim, which I grant, is that moral status enhancement to the effect of creating beings with a moral status higher than that of persons—post-persons—is possible. My chief objection to Agar's argument is that it is biased in favour of persons. This comes out when he sums it up: ‘the creation of post-persons would be a morally bad thing. It is likely to impose significant penalties on mere persons’. Suppose it is true that the creation of post-persons will impose such significant penalties on mere persons that they are worse off than they were before the creation of post-persons. Then it follows that the creation of post-persons is bad for mere persons, but it does not follow that it is bad overall. This follows only if it is not the case that post-persons receive benefits to an extent that morally outweighs the burdens to mere persons. As far as I can see, Agar does not show this—that is why I think he is biased towards mere persons, and simply assumes that what is bad for them is bad overall.I have, in fact, been too concessive to Agar …
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Robert Sparrow (2014). Egalitarianism and Moral Bioenhancement. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (4):20-28.
Similar books and articles
N. Agar (2012). Why We Can't Really Say What Post-Persons Are. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (3):144-145.
N. Agar (2013). Still Afraid of Needy Post-Persons. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (2):81-83.
Nicholas Agar (2002). Agar's Review of Katz. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 17 (1):123-139.
T. L. Agar (1910). Mr. T. W. Allen on Agar's Homerica. Classical Quarterly 4 (01):58-.
Robert Sparrow (2011). Liberalism and Eugenics. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):499 - 517.
J. Wilson (2012). Persons, Post-Persons and Thresholds. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (3):143-144.
Wade Roberts (2007). Autonomy, Pluralism, and the Future of the Species: Agar and Habermas on Liberal Eugenics. Philosophical Explorations 22:153-167.
S. K. Wertz (2012). Persons and Collingwoods Account. Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 17 (2):189-202.
Nicholas Agar (2012). On the Irrationality of Mind-Uploading: A Rely to Neil Levy. [REVIEW] AI and Society 27 (4):431-436.
Ingmar Persson (1995). Peter Singer on Why Persons Are Irreplaceable. Utilitas 7 (1):55.
Ingmar Persson (1999). Our Identity and the Separability of Persons and Organisms. Dialogue 38 (03):519-.
Nguyen Cat Ho & Helena Rasiowa (1987). Semi-Post Algebras. Studia Logica 46 (2):149 - 160.
Lynne Baker (2007). Persons and Other Things. Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (s 5-6):17-36.
Wade Roberts (2006). Autonomy, Pluralism and the Future of the Species. Social Philosophy Today 22:153-167.
Lynne Rudder Baker (2007). Persons and Other Things. Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (5-6):5-6.
Added to index2012-10-11
Total downloads8 ( #394,418 of 1,907,534 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #273,183 of 1,907,534 )
How can I increase my downloads?