90 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
David Degrazia [82]D. Degrazia [8]David Dion Degrazia [1]
  1.  62
    David DeGrazia (2005). Human Identity and Bioethics. Cambridge University Press.
    When philosophers address personal identity, they usually explore numerical identity: what are the criteria for a person's continuing existence? When non-philosophers address personal identity, they often have in mind narrative identity: Which characteristics of a particular person are salient to her self-conception? This book develops accounts of both senses of identity, arguing that both are normatively important, and is unique in its exploration of a range of issues in bioethics through the lens of identity. Defending a biological view of our (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   41 citations  
  2.  86
    David DeGrazia (1996). Taking Animals Seriously: Mental Life and Moral Status. Cambridge University Press.
    This book distinguishes itself from much of the polemical literature on these issues by offering the most judicious and well-balanced account yet available of animals' moral standing, and related questions concerning their minds and welfare. Transcending jejune debates focused on utilitarianism versus rights, the book offers a fresh methodological approach with specific and constructive conclusions about our treatment of animals. David DeGrazia provides the most thorough discussion yet of whether equal consideration should be extended to animals' interests, and examines the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   48 citations  
  3.  49
    D. DeGrazia (2014). Moral Enhancement, Freedom, and What We (Should) Value in Moral Behaviour. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (6):361-368.
  4. David DeGrazia (2009). Moral Vegetarianism From a Very Broad Basis. Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):143-165.
    This paper defends a qualified version of moral vegetarianism. It defends a weak thesis and, more tentatively, a strong thesis, both from a very broad basis that assumes neither that animals have rights nor that they are entitled to equal consideration. The essay's only assumption about moral status, an assumption defended in the analysis of the wrongness of cruelty to animals, is that sentient animals have at least some moral status. One need not be a strong champion of animal protection, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  5. David DeGrazia (2014). The Case for Moderate Gun Control. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24 (1):1-25.
    In addressing the shape of appropriate gun policy, this essay assumes for the sake of discussion that there is a legal and moral right to private gun ownership. My thesis is that, against the background of this right, the most defensible policy approach in the United States would feature moderate gun control. The first section summarizes the American gun control status quo and characterizes what I call “moderate gun control.” The next section states and rebuts six leading arguments against this (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  9
    David DeGrazia (2012). Creation Ethics: Reproduction, Genetics, and Quality of Life. OUP Usa.
    Creation Ethics illuminates an array of issues in "reprogenetics" through the lens of moral philosophy. With novel frameworks for understanding prenatal moral status and human identity, David DeGrazia tackles the ethics of abortion and embryo research, genetic enhancement and prenatal genetic interventions, procreation and parenting, and obligations to future generations.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  7. David Degrazia (2005). Enhancement Technologies and Human Identity. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (3):261 – 283.
    As the President's Council on Bioethics emphasized in a recent report, rapid growth of biotechnologies creates increasingly many possibilities for enhancing human traits. This article addresses the claim that enhancement via biotechnology is inherently problematic for reasons pertaining to our identity. After clarifying the concept of enhancement, and providing a framework for understanding human identity, I examine the relationship between enhancement and identity. Then I investigate two identity-related challenges to biotechnological enhancements: (1) the charge of inauthenticity and (2) the charge (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  8.  84
    David DeGrazia (2014). Handguns, Moral Rights, and Physical Security. Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (1):56-76.
    Guns occupy a major—sometimes terrible—place in contemporary American life. Do Americans have not only a legal right, but also a moral right, to own handguns? After introducing the topic, this paper examines what a moral right to private handgun ownership would amount to. It then elucidates the logical structure of the strongest argument in favor of such a right, an argument that appeals to physical security, before assessing its cogency and identifying two questionable assumptions. In light of persisting reasonable disagreement (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  8
    David Degrazia (2000). Prozac, Enhancement, and Self‐Creation. Hastings Center Report 30 (2):34-40.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   18 citations  
  10. David DeGrazia (2002). Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
    This volume provides a general overview of the basic ethical and philosophical issues of animal rights. It asks questions such as: Do animals have moral rights? If so, what does this mean? What sorts of mental lives do animals have, and how should we understand welfare? By presenting models for understanding animals' moral status and rights, and examining their mental lives and welfare, David DeGrazia explores the implications for how we should treat animals in connection with our diet, zoos, and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  11.  90
    David DeGrazia (2008). Moral Status as a Matter of Degree? Southern Journal of Philosophy 46 (2):181-198.
    Some people contend that fetuses have moral status but less than that of paradigm persons. Many people hold views implying that sentient animals have moral status but less than that of persons. These positions suggest that moral status admits of degrees. Does it? To address this question, we must first clarify what it means to speak of degrees of moral status. The paper begins by clarifying the more basic concept of moral status and presenting two models of degrees ofmoral status. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  12. David DeGrazia (2010). Is It Wrong to Impose the Harms of Human Life? A Reply to Benatar. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (4):317-331.
    Might it be morally wrong to procreate? David Benatar answers affirmatively in Better Never to Have Been , arguing that coming into existence is always a great harm. I counter this view in several ways. First, I argue against Benatar’s asserted asymmetry between harm and benefit—which would support the claim that any amount of harm in a human life would make it not worth starting—while questioning the significance of his distinction between a life worth starting and one worth continuing. I (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  13.  70
    David Degrazia (2007). Human-Animal Chimeras: Human Dignity, Moral Status, and Species Prejudice. Metaphilosophy 38 (2-3):309–329.
  14.  26
    David DeGrazia (2009). Self-Awareness in Animals. In Robert W. Lurz (ed.), The Philosophy of Animal Minds. Cambridge University Press 201--217.
  15.  56
    David Degrazia (1992). Moving Forward in Bioethical Theory: Theories, Cases, and Specified Principlism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):511-539.
    The field of bioethics has deployed different models of justification for particular moral judgments. The best known models are those of deductivism, casuistry, and principlism (under one, rather limited interpretation). Each of these models, however, has significant difficulties that are explored in this essay. An alternative model, suggested by the work of Henry Richardson, is presented. It is argued that specified principlism is the most promising model of justification in bioethics. Keywords: casuistry, deductivism, ethical theories, intuition principlism, specified principlism, specification (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  16.  77
    David DeGrazia (2003). Common Morality, Coherence, and the Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):219-230.
    : The fifth edition of Beauchamp and Childress's Principles of Biomedical Ethics is distinguished by its emphatic embrace of common morality as the ultimate source of moral norms. This essay critically evaluates the fifth edition's discussion of common morality and, to a lesser extent, its treatment of coherence (both the model of ethical justification and the associated concept). It is argued that the book is overly accommodating of existing moral beliefs. The paper concludes with three suggestions for improving this leading (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  17. D. DeGrazia (1998). Animal Ethics Around the Turn of the Twenty-First Century. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 11 (2):111-129.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  18. David Degrazia (1999). The Ethics of Animal Research: What Are the Prospects for Agreement? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8 (1):23-34.
    Few human uses of nonhuman animals have incited as much controversy as the use of animals in biomedical research. The political exchanges over this issue tend to produce much more heat than light, as representatives of both biomedicine and the animal protection community accuse opponents of being and the like. However, a healthy number of individuals within these two communities offer the possibility of a more illuminating discussion of the ethics of animal research.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  19.  34
    David Degrazia (2003). Identity, Killing, and the Boundaries of Our Existence. Philosophy and Public Affairs 31 (4):413–442.
  20.  67
    David Degrazia (1999). Advance Directives, Dementia, and 'The Someone Else Problem'. Bioethics 13 (5):373-391.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  21.  74
    David DeGrazia (2008). Single Payer Meets Managed Competition: The Case for Public Funding and Private Delivery. Hastings Center Report 38 (1):23-33.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  22.  14
    David DeGrazia (2014). On the Moral Status of Infants and the Cognitively Disabled: A Reply to Jaworska and Tannenbaum. Ethics 124 (3):543-556.
    Agnieszka Jaworska and Julie Tannenbaum address a central problem confronting efforts to understand moral status: the Problem of Nonparadigm Humans. The authors contend that human infants and cognitively disabled human beings whose capacities are comparable to those of dogs nevertheless have higher moral status. In this discussion, I will first reconstruct the authors’ assumptions and argumentative goals. In the article’s two major sections, I will examine the authors’ reasoning in pursuit of those goals and contend that the chain of argumentation (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  23.  18
    David DeGrazia (2014). Persons, Dolphins, and Human–Nonhuman Chimeras. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (2):17-18.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  3
    David DeGrazia (2016). Nonhuman Primates, Human Need, and Ethical Constraints. Hastings Center Report 46 (4):27-28.
    “The Ethics of Infection Challenges in Primates,” by Anne Barnhill, Steven Joffe, and Franklin Miller, is an exceptionally timely contribution to the literature on animal research ethics. Animal research has long been both a source of high hopes and a cause for moral concern. When it comes to infection challenge studies with nonhuman primates, neither the hope—to save thousands of human lives from such diseases as Ebola and Marburg—nor the concern—the conviction that primates deserve especially strong protections—could be much higher. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  56
    D. Degrazia (2002). Are We Essentially Persons? Olson, Baker, and a Reply. Philosophical Forum 33 (1):81-99.
  26. D. DeGrazia (2012). Genetic Enhancement, Post-Persons and Moral Status: A Reply to Buchanan. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (3):135-139.
    Responding to several leading ideas from a paper by Allen Buchanan, the present essay explores the implications of genetic enhancement for moral status. Contrary to doubts expressed by Buchanan, I argue that genetic enhancement could lead to the existence of beings so superior to contemporary human beings that we might aptly describe them as post-persons. If such post-persons emerged, how should we understand their moral status in relation to ours? The answer depends in part on which of two general models (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  9
    David DeGrazia (forthcoming). The Definition of Death. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28.  65
    David DeGrazia (1997). Great Apes, Dolphins, and the Concept of Personhood. Southern Journal of Philosophy 35 (3):301-320.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  29.  10
    David DeGrazia (2006). Moral Status, Human Identity, and Early Embryos: A Critique of the President's Approach. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 34 (1):49-57.
    Underlying President Bush's view regarding stemcell research and cloning are two assumptions: we originate at conception, and we have full moral status as soon as we originate. I will challenge both assumptions, argue that at least the second is mistaken, and conclude that the President's approach is unsustainable.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  30. David DeGrazia (2012). Taking Animals Seriously: Mental Life and Moral Status. Cambridge University Press.
    This book distinguishes itself from much of the polemical literature on these issues by offering the most judicious and well-balanced account yet available of animals' moral standing, and related questions concerning their minds and welfare. Transcending jejune debates focused on utilitarianism versus rights, the book offers a fresh methodological approach with specific and constructive conclusions about our treatment of animals. David DeGrazia provides the most thorough discussion yet of whether equal consideration should be extended to animals' interests, and examines the (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  31.  13
    David DeGrazia (2014). Handguns, Moral Rights, and Physical Security. Brill.
    _ Source: _Page Count 21 Guns occupy a major—sometimes terrible—place in contemporary American life. Do Americans have not only a legal right, but also a moral right, to own handguns? After introducing the topic, this paper examines what a moral right to private handgun ownership would amount to. It then elucidates the logical structure of the strongest argument in favor of such a right, an argument that appeals to physical security, before assessing its cogency and identifying two questionable assumptions. In (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  70
    David Degrazia (2007). The Harm of Death, Time-Relative Interests, and Abortion. Philosophical Forum 38 (1):57–80.
    Regarding the sinking lifeboat scenario involving several human beings and a dog, nearly everyone agrees that it is right to sacrifice the dog. I suggest that the best explanation for this considered judgment, an explanation that appears to time-relative interests, contains a key insight about prudential value. This insight, I argue, also provides perhaps the most promising reply to the future-like-ours argument, which is widely regarded as the strongest moral argument against abortion. Providing a solution to a longstanding puzzle in (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  33.  10
    David DeGrazia (2008). Meets: Managed Competition. Hastings Center Report 38 (1):23-33.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  34.  27
    David Degrazia (1995). Value Theory and the Best Interests Standard. Bioethics 9 (1):50–61.
    The idea of a patient's best interests raises issues in prudential value theory–the study of what makes up an individual's ultimate good or well‐being. While this connection may strike a philosopher as obvious, the literature on the best interests standard reveals almost no engagement of recent work in value theory. There seems to be a growing sentiment among bioethicists that their work is independent of philosophical theorizing. Is this sentiment wrong in the present case? Does value theory make a significant (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  35.  88
    David DeGrazia & Andrew Rowan (1991). Pain, Suffering, and Anxiety in Animals and Humans. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 12 (3).
    We attempt to bring the concepts of pain, suffering, and anxiety into sufficient focus to make them serviceable for empirical investigation. The common-sense view that many animals experience these phenomena is supported by empirical and philosophical arguments. We conclude, first, that pain, suffering, and anxiety are different conceptually and as phenomena, and should not be conflated. Second, suffering can be the result — or perhaps take the form — of a variety of states including pain, anxiety, fear, and boredom. Third, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  36.  7
    David Degrazia & Jeff Sebo (2015). Necessary Conditions for Morally Responsible Animal Research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):420-430.
    In this paper, we present three necessary conditions for morally responsible animal research that we believe people on both sides of this debate can accept. Specifically, we argue that, even if human beings have higher moral status than nonhuman animals, animal research is morally permissible only if it satisfies (a) an expectation of sufficient net benefit, (b) a worthwhile-life condition, and (c) a no unnecessary-harm/qualified-basic-needs condition. We then claim that, whether or not these necessary conditions are jointly sufficient conditions of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  38
    David DeGrazia (2007). Must We Have Full Moral Status Throughout Our Existence? A Reply to Alfonso Gomez-Lobo. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 17 (4):297-310.
    : Those who are morally opposed to abortion generally make several pivotal assumptions. This paper focuses on the assumption that we have full moral status throughout our existence. Coupled with the assumption that we come into existence at conception, the assumption about moral status entails that all human fetuses have full moral status, including a right to life. Is the assumption about moral status correct? In addressing this question, I respond to several arguments advanced, in this journal and other venues, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  38.  9
    David DeGrazia (2016). Modal Personhood and Moral Status: A Reply to Kagan's Proposal. Journal of Applied Philosophy 33 (1):22-25.
    Kagan argues that human beings who are neither persons nor even potential persons — if their impairment is independent of genetic constitution — are modal persons: individuals who might have been persons. Moreover, he proposes a view according to which both personhood and modal personhood are sufficient for counting more, morally, than nonhuman animals. In response to this proposal, I raise one relatively minor concern about Kagan's reasoning — that he judges too quickly that insentient beings can have interests — (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  3
    David DeGrazia (1990). On Singer: More Argument, Less Prescriptivism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (1):18.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  40. Anita Allen, Lawrence C. Becker, Deryck Beyleveld, David Cummiskey, David DeGrazia, David M. Gallagher, Alan Gewirth, Virginia Held, Barbara Koziak, Donald Regan, Jeffrey Reiman, Henry Richardson, Beth J. Singer, Michael Slote, Edward Spence & James P. Sterba (1998). Gewirth: Critical Essays on Action, Rationality, and Community. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    As one of the most important ethicists to emerge since the Second World War, Alan Gewirth continues to influence philosophical debates concerning morality. In this ground-breaking book, Gewirth's neo-Kantianism, and the communitarian problems discussed, form a dialogue on the foundation of moral theory. Themes of agent-centered constraints, the formal structure of theories, and the relationship between freedom and duty are examined along with such new perspectives as feminism, the Stoics, and Sartre. Gewirth offers a picture of the philosopher's theory and (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  41. David DeGrazia & Jeffrey Brand-Ballard (eds.) (2010). Biomedical Ethics. Mcgraw-Hill Higher Education.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42.  2
    David DeGrazia (2006). Moral Status, Human Identity, and Early Embryos: A Critique of the President's Approach. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34 (1):49-57.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  43.  8
    David DeGrazia (2014). Handguns, Moral Rights, and Physical Security. New Content is Available for Journal of Moral Philosophy.
    _ Source: _Page Count 21 Guns occupy a major—sometimes terrible—place in contemporary American life. Do Americans have not only a legal right, but also a moral right, to own handguns? After introducing the topic, this paper examines what a moral right to private handgun ownership would amount to. It then elucidates the logical structure of the strongest argument in favor of such a right, an argument that appeals to physical security, before assessing its cogency and identifying two questionable assumptions. In (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Spencer Abraham, Ray Anderson, Nik Ansell, St Thomas Aquinas, St Francis of Assisi, William Baxter, Philip J. Bentley, Joachim Blatter, Murray Bookchin, Maya Brennan, Majora Carter, Carl Cohen, Deane Curtin, Herman Daly, David DeGrazia, Bill Devall, Calvin DeWitt, David Ehrenfeld, Paul, Anne Ehrlich, Robert Elliot, Stuart Ewen, Nuria Fernandez, Stephen Gardiner, Ramachandra Guha, Garrett Hardin, Eugene Hargrove, John Hasse, Po-Keung Ip, Ralf Isenmann, Kauser Jahan, Marianne B. Karsh, Andrew Kernohan, Marti Kheel, Kenneth Kraft, Aldo Leopold, Miriam MacGillis, Juan Martinez-Alier, Ed McGaa, Katie McShane, Roberto Mechoso, Arne Naess, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Michael Nelson, Bryan Norton, Philip Nyhus, John O'Neil, Stephen Pacala, Ernest Partridge, Erv Peterson, Tom Regan, Holmes Rolston Iii, Lily-Marlene Russow, Mark Sagoff, Kristin Schrader-Frechette, Erroll Schweizer, George Sessions, Vandana Shiva, Peter Singer, Stephen Socolow, Paul Steidlmeier, Richard Sylvan, Bron Taylor & Paul Taylor (2009). Earthcare: An Anthology in Environmental Ethics. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    Earthcare: Readings and Cases in Environmental Ethics presents a diverse collection of writings from a variety of authors on environmental ethics, environmental science, and the environmental movement overall. Exploring a broad range of world views, religions and philosophies, David W. Clowney and Patricia Mosto bring together insightful thoughts on the ethical issues arising in various areas of environmental concern.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  45.  10
    David DeGrazia (2016). Ethical Reflections on Genetic Enhancement with the Aim of Enlarging Altruism. Health Care Analysis 24 (3):180-195.
    When it comes to caring about and helping those in need, our imaginations tend to be weak and our motivation tends to be parochial. This is a major moral problem in view of how much unmet need there is in the world and how much material capacity there is to address that need. With this problem in mind, the present paper will focus on genetic means to the enhancement of a moral capacity—a disposition to altruism—and of a cognitive capacity that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  2
    David Degrazia (2003). Identity, Killing, and the Boundaries of Our Existence. Philosophy and Public Affairs 31 (4):413-442.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  47.  61
    David DeGrazia (2003). Carl Cohen and Tom Regan, The Animal Rights Debate:The Animal Rights Debate. Ethics 113 (3):692-695.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. Thomas A. Mappes & David Degrazia (1996). Biomedical Ethics.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  49.  53
    David DeGrazia (1993). Equal Consideration and Unequal Moral Status. Southern Journal of Philosophy 31 (1):17-31.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  29
    David DeGrazia (1999). Persons, Organisms, and Death: A Philosophical Critique of the Higher-Brain Approach. Southern Journal of Philosophy 37 (3):419-440.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 90