David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 9 (1):57-66 (2012)
Are embryos deserving of moral consideration in our actions? A standard view suggests that embryos are considerable only if they have interests. One argument for embryonic interests contends that embryos are harmed by death because they are deprived of valuable future lives as adult persons. Some have challenged this argument on the grounds that embryos aren’t identical to adults: either due to the potential for embryos to twin or because we do not exist until the fetus develops consciousness. These arguments fail to show that embryos do not have future adult lives. There is a better reason to think that embryos cannot have interests; namely, because they are not capable of having desires. Others have held this view but have not sufficiently justified it. The justification lies in the fact that the capacity for desires is necessary to make sense of the normativity of interests.
|Keywords||embryos interests harm consciousness identity twinning|
|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
David Hume (1739/2000). A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford University Press.
David DeGrazia (2005). Human Identity and Bioethics. Cambridge University Press.
Joel Feinberg (1982). Rights, Justice, and the Bounds of Liberty. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 43 (1):120-127.
Citations of this work BETA
Catherine Waldby, Ian Kerridge & Loane Skene (2012). Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Donation of Stem Cells and Reproductive Tissue. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 9 (1):15-17.
Similar books and articles
Carolyn Mcleod & Françoise Baylis (2007). Donating Fresh Versus Frozen Embryos to Stem Cell Research: In Whose Interests? Bioethics 21 (9):465–477.
Mark Walker (2014). Eugenic Selection Benefits Embryos. Bioethics 28 (5):214-224.
Carolyn McLeod & Françoise Baylis (2006). Feminists on the Inalienability of Human Embryos. Hypatia 21 (1):1-14.
S. Matthew Liao (2006). The Embryo Rescue Case. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (2):141-147.
Christian Munthe (2001). Divisibility and the Moral Status of Embryos. Bioethics 15 (5-6):382-397.
Alfonso Gómez-Lobo (2004). Does Respect for Embryos Entail Respect for Gametes? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (3):199-208.
Alfonso Gómez-Lobo (2005). On Potentiality and Respect for Embryos: A Reply to Mary Mahowald. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (2):105-110.
Phillip Montague (2011). Stem Cell Research and the Problem of Embryonic Identity. Journal of Ethics 15 (4):307-319.
Howard J. Curzer (2004). The Ethics of Embryonic Stem Cell Research. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 29 (5):533 – 562.
Stephen S. Hanson (2006). “More on Respect for Embryos and Potentiality: Does Respect for Embryos Entail Respect for in Vitro Embryos?”. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (3):215-226.
Jeremy Williams (2010). Resolving Disputes Over Frozen Embryos: A New Proposal. Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (2):172-185.
Mark Moller (2009). Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and the Discarded Embryo Argument. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (2):131-145.
E. Christian Brugger (2009). “Other Selves”: Moral and Legal Proposals Regarding the Personhood of Cryopreserved Human Embryos. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (2):105-129.
Jeff Mcmahan (2007). Killing Embryos for Stem Cell Research. Metaphilosophy 38 (2-3):170–189.
P. Tully (2011). Researchers and Firing Squads: Questions Concerning the Use of Frozen Human Embryos. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (5):516-528.
Added to index2011-11-21
Total downloads27 ( #125,438 of 1,780,218 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #204,589 of 1,780,218 )
How can I increase my downloads?