David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):499 - 517 (2011)
‘Liberal eugenics’ has emerged as the most popular position amongst philosophers writing in the contemporary debate about the ethics of human enhancement. This position has been most clearly articulated by Nicholas Agar, who argues that the ‘new’ liberal eugenics can avoid the repugnant consequences associated with eugenics in the past. Agar suggests that parents should be free to make only those interventions into the genetics of their children that will benefit them no matter what way of life they grow up to endorse. I argue that Agar's attempt to distinguish the new from the old eugenics fails. Once we start to consciously determine the genetics of future persons, we will not be able to avoid controversial assumptions about the relative worth of different life plans. Liberal eugenicists therefore confront the horns of a dilemma. Whichever way they try to resolve it, the consequences of widespread use of technologies of genetic selection are likely to look more like the old eugenics than defenders of the new eugenics have acknowledged
|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
Derek Parfit (1984). Reasons and Persons. Oxford University Press.
John Harris (2007). Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People. Princeton University Press.
Allen E. Buchanan, Dan W. Brock, Norman Daniels & Daniel Wikler (2000). From Chance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. Cambridge University Press.
Julian Savulescu (2001). Procreative Beneficence: Why We Should Select the Best Children. Bioethics 15 (5-6):413-426.
Citations of this work BETA
Robert Sparrow (2013). Queerin' the PGD Clinic. Journal of Medical Humanities 34 (2):177-196.
Similar books and articles
Donovan Miyasaki, Breeding as Critique of Taming and Eugenics: Nietzsche’s Naturalist Morality of Cultivation.
Nicholas Agar (2008). Liberal Eugenics: In Defence of Human Enhancement. John Wiley & Sons.
Jyotsna Agnihotri Gupta (2007). Private and Public Eugenics: Genetic Testing and Screening in India. [REVIEW] Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4 (3):217-228.
Donovan Miyasaki (2014). Nietzsche's Naturalist Morality of Breeding: A Critique of Eugenics as Taming. In Vanessa Lemm (ed.), Nietzsche and the Becoming of Life. Fordham University Press 194-213.
Bernard G. Prusak (2005). Rethinking "Liberal Eugenics": Reflections and Questions on Habermas on Bioethics. Hastings Center Report 35 (6):31-42.
Floris Tomasini (2007). Imagining Human Enhancement: Whose Future, Which Rationality? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (6):497-507.
Wade Roberts (2006). Autonomy, Pluralism and the Future of the Species. Social Philosophy Today 22:153-167.
Wade Roberts (2007). Autonomy, Pluralism, and the Future of the Species: Agar and Habermas on Liberal Eugenics. Philosophical Explorations 22:153-167.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads79 ( #55,576 of 1,911,611 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #321,691 of 1,911,611 )
How can I increase my downloads?