David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (6):311-312 (2007)
Stem cell research represents the most promising field of investigation for treatment of many degenerative diseases. The veto against this research condemns millions of people to a life with little hope of cureO vous, les boutefeux, ô vous les bons apôtres, Mourez donc les premiers, nous vous cédons le pas, Mais de grâce, morbleu! laissez vivre les autres!Last year, Rome hosted the first meeting of the World Congress For Freedom of Scientific Research.The Congress was organised by the Luca Coscioni Association, an organisation of scientists, patients and citizens committed to freedom of scientific research and the assertion of the rights of patients and disabled people.The Congress was exceptional for at least three reasons:First, the moving force of the whole congress, and of the many struggles for freedom conducted by the Luca Coscioni Association, has been Luca Coscioni himself, the President of the Association. Despite the severe degenerative illness that rendered Luca immobile and destined him to tragic and premature death, Luca remained committed to the ideals of freedom, and on the first day of the Congress, just days before his death, he eloquently expressed his appeal. This not only touched every one present, but also reminded us all that when we talk of scientific research, we talk of real people, who have real lives and real illnesses, and who are destined to die prematurely and in agony unless treatment is found—and hope for treatment for many degenerative diseases bears upon embryonic stem cell research. Luca reminded us that while the public discusses …
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Torsten Wilholt (2010). Scientific Freedom: Its Grounds and Their Limitations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (2):174-181.
Erik Anderson (2008). Scientific Essentialism, Could've Done Otherwise, And the Possibility of Freedom. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 15:13-20.
Mary T. Clark (ed.) (1973). The Problem of Freedom. New York,Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Kurt Bayertz (2006). Three Arguments for Scientific Freedom. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 9 (4):377 - 398.
Michael Dummett (1981). Ought Research to Be Unrestricted? Grazer Philosophische Studien 12:281-298.
Gustavo L. T. Oliveirdea (2006). On Recent Scientific Advances and Incompatibilist Freedom. Florida Philosophical Review 6 (1):17-30.
Heidi Kjærnet (2010). At Arm's Length? Applied Social Science and its Sponsors. Journal of Academic Ethics 8 (3):161-169.
Wells Earl Draughon (2003). What Freedom Is. Writer's Showcase.
Helga Varden (2010). Lockean Freedom and the Proviso's Appeal to Scientific Knowledge. Social Theory and Practice 36 (1):1-20.
Mari Stenlund (2011). Involuntary Antipsychotic Medication and Freedom of Thought. Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences 4 (2):31-33.
Alison M. Jaggar (2007). Teaching in Colorado: Not a Rocky Mountain High; Academic Freedom in a Climate of Repression. Teaching Philosophy 30 (2):149-172.
Robin Barrow (2009). Academic Freedom: Its Nature, Extent and Value. British Journal of Educational Studies 57 (2):178 - 190.
By Alan Carter (2003). Morality and Freedom. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (211):161–180.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-08-24
Total downloads1 ( #467,866 of 1,168,018 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?