Search results for 'Genetic engineering Criminal provisions' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Amel Alghrani, Rebecca Bennett & Suzanne Ost (eds.) (2012). Bioethics, Medicine, and the Criminal Law: The Criminal Law and Bioethical Conflict: Walking the Tightrope. Cambridge University Press.score: 480.0
    Machine generated contents note: 1. Introduction - when criminal law encounters bioethics: a case of tensions and incompatibilities or an apt forum for resolving ethical conflict? Amel Alghrani, Rebecca Bennett and Suzanne Ost; Part I. Death, Dying, and the Criminal Law: 2. Euthanasia and assisted suicide should, when properly performed by a doctor in an appropriate case, be decriminalised John Griffiths; 3. Five flawed arguments for decriminalising euthanasia John Keown; 4. Euthanasia excused: between prohibition and permission Richard Huxtable; (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Amel Alghrani, Rebecca Bennett & Suzanne Ost (eds.) (2013). Bioethics, Medicine, and the Criminal Law. Cambridge University Press.score: 480.0
    Machine generated contents note: 1. Introduction - when criminal law encounters bioethics: a case of tensions and incompatibilities or an apt forum for resolving ethical conflict? Amel Alghrani, Rebecca Bennett and Suzanne Ost; Part I. Death, Dying, and the Criminal Law: 2. Euthanasia and assisted suicide should, when properly performed by a doctor in an appropriate case, be decriminalised John Griffiths; 3. Five flawed arguments for decriminalising euthanasia John Keown; 4. Euthanasia excused: between prohibition and permission Richard Huxtable; (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Lynn J. Frewer, Chaya Howard & Richard Shepherd (1998). The Influence of Initial Attitudes on Responses to Communication About Genetic Engineering in Food Production. Agriculture and Human Values 15 (1):15-30.score: 267.0
    Source credibility has been thought to bean important determinant of peoples‘ reactions toinformation about technology. There has also been muchdebate about the need to communicate effectively withthe public about genetic engineering, particularlywithin the context of food production. Questionnaireswere used to investigate the impact of sourcecredibility, admission of risk uncertainty, andinitial attitude towards genetic engineering onattitudes of respondents after information provision.120 respondents with positive attitudes towardsgenetic engineering in food production were providedwith persuasive information about the technology,where (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Genetic Engineering & A. Towards (2002). Ian Holliday. In Julia Lai Po-Wah Tao (ed.), Cross-Cultural Perspectives on the (Im) Possibility of Global Bioethics. Kluwer Academic Pub..score: 240.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Massimo Pigliucci (2013). Getting a Rise Out of Genetic Engineering. In John Huss (ed.), Planet of the Apes and Philosophy: Great Apes Think Alike. Open Court.score: 216.0
    What makes humans different from other animals, what humans are entitled to do to other species, whether time travel is possible, what limits should be placed on science and technology, the morality and practicality of genetic engineering—these are just some of the philosophical problems raised by Planet of the Apes. Planet of the Apes and Philosophy looks at all the deeper issues involved in the Planet of the Apes stories. It covers the entire franchise, from Pierre Boulle’s 1963 (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Russell Powell (2010). The Evolutionary Biological Implications of Human Genetic Engineering. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (1):22.score: 216.0
    A common worry about the genetic engineering of human beings is that it will reduce human genetic diversity, creating a biological monoculture that could not only increase our susceptibility to disease but also hasten the extinction of our species. Thus far, however, the evolutionary implications of human genetic modification remain largely unexplored. In this paper, I consider whether the widespread use of genetic engineering technology is likely to narrow the present range of genetic (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Martin Gunderson (2007). Seeking Perfection: A Kantian Look at Human Genetic Engineering. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (2):87-102.score: 216.0
    It is tempting to argue that Kantian moral philosophy justifies prohibiting both human germ-line genetic engineering and non-therapeutic genetic engineering because they fail to respect human dignity. There are, however, good reasons for resisting this temptation. In fact, Kant’s moral philosophy provides reasons that support genetic engineering—even germ-line and non-therapeutic. This is true of Kant’s imperfect duties to seek one’s own perfection and the happiness of others. It is also true of the categorical imperative. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Rob De Vries (2006). Genetic Engineering and the Integrity of Animals. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (5):469-493.score: 216.0
    Genetic engineering evokes a number of objections that are not directed at the negative effects the technique might have on the health and welfare of the modified animals. The concept of animal integrity is often invoked to articulate these kind of objections. Moreover, in reaction to the advent of genetic engineering, the concept has been extended from the level of the individual animal to the level of the genome and of the species. However, the concept of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Maurizio G. Paoletti & David Pimentel (2000). Environmental Risks of Pesticides Versus Genetic Engineering for Agricultural Pest Control. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12 (3):279-303.score: 216.0
    Despite the application of 2.5 million tons ofpesticides worldwide, more than 40% of all potentialfood production is lost to insect, weed, and plantpathogen pests prior to harvest. After harvest, anadditional 20% of food is lost to another group ofpests. The use of pesticides for pest control resultsin an estimated 26 million human poisonings, with220,000 fatalities, annually worldwide. In the UnitedStates, the environmental and public health costs forthe recommended use of pesticides total approximately$9 billion/yr. Thus, there is a need for alternativenon-chemical (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Philipp Balzer, Klaus Peter Rippe & Peter Schaber (2000). Two Concepts of Dignity for Humans and Non-Human Organisms in the Context of Genetic Engineering. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (1):7-27.score: 216.0
    The 1992 incorporation of an article by referendum in the SwissConstitution mandating that the federal government issue regulations onthe use of genetic material that take into account the dignity ofnonhuman organism raises philosophical questions about how we shouldunderstand what is meant by ``the dignity of nonhuman animals,'' andabout what sort of moral demands arise from recognizing this dignitywith respect to their genetic engineering. The first step in determiningwhat is meant is to clarify the difference between dignity when (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Grzegorz Bugajak (2004). Theology and Genetic Engineering: New Incarnation of the Old Conflict? In Ulf Görman, Willem B. Drees & Hubert Meisinger (eds.), Studies in Science and Theology, vol. 9(2003–2004), Lunds Universitet, Lund. 127–143.score: 216.0
    It is widely acknowledged among science˗and˗theology thinkers – or at least desired – that we have left behind the era of conflict between science and religion. An approach which avoids conflict by pointing out that science and religion employ two different methodologies and therefore occupy two separate magisteria, is, however, unsatisfactory for both – the advocates of a fruitful dialogue between these two realms of human activity as well as the most vigorous opponents of possible conciliation, and the latter still (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Russell Powell, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2012). Evolution, Genetic Engineering, and Human Enhancement. Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):439-458.score: 216.0
    There are many ways that biological theory can inform ethical discussions of genetic engineering and biomedical enhancement. In this essay, we highlight some of these potential contributions, and along the way provide a synthetic overview of the papers that comprise this special issue. We begin by comparing and contrasting genetic engineering with programs of selective breeding that led to the domestication of plants and animals, and we consider how genetic engineering differs from other contemporary (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Anders Melin (2004). Genetic Engineering and the Moral Status of Non-Human Species. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (6):479-495.score: 216.0
    Genetic modification leads to several important moral issues. Up until now they have mainly been discussed from the viewpoint that only individual living beings, above all animals, are morally considerable. The standpoint that also collective entities such as species belong to the moral sphere have seldom been taken into account in a more thorough way, although it is advocated by several important environmental ethicists. The main purpose of this article is to analyze in more detail than often has been (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Marko Ahteensuu (2012). Assumptions of the Deficit Model Type of Thinking: Ignorance, Attitudes, and Science Communication in the Debate on Genetic Engineering in Agriculture. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):295-313.score: 216.0
    This paper spells out and discusses four assumptions of the deficit model type of thinking. The assumptions are: First, the public is ignorant of science. Second, the public has negative attitudes towards (specific instances of) science and technology. Third, ignorance is at the root of these negative attitudes. Fourth, the public’s knowledge deficit can be remedied by one-way science communication from scientists to citizens. It is argued that there is nothing wrong with ignorance-based explanations per se. Ignorance accounts at least (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Andrew Sneddon (2005). Rawlsian Decisionmaking and Genetic Engineering. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (01):35-41.score: 216.0
    This paper evaluates Sara Goering’s recent attempt to use the Rawlsian notion of the veil of ignorance as a tool for distinguishing permissible from impermissible forms of genetic engineering. I argue that her article fails due to a failure to include vital contextual information in the right way.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Christian J. Peters (2000). Genetic Engineering in Agriculture: Who Stands to Benefit? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):313-327.score: 216.0
    The use of genetic engineering inagriculture has been the source of much debate. Todate, arguments have focused most strongly on thepotential human health risks, the flow of geneticmaterial to related species, and ecologicalconsequences. Little attention appears to have beengiven to a more fundamental concern, namely, who willbe the beneficiaries of this technology?Given the prevalence of chronic hunger and thestark economics of farming, it is arguable thatfarmers and the hungry should be the mainbeneficiaries of agricultural research. However, theapplication of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Chris Gyngell (2012). Enhancing the Species: Genetic Engineering Technologies and Human Persistence. Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):495-512.score: 216.0
    Many of the existing ethical analyses of genetic engineering technologies (GET) focus on how they can be used to enhance individuals—to improve individual well-being, health and cognition. There is a gap in the current literature about the specific ways enhancement technologies could be used to improve our populations and species, viewed as a whole. In this paper, I explore how GET may be used to enhance the species through improvements in the gene pool. I argue one aspect of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Traci Warkentin (2006). Dis/Integrating Animals: Ethical Dimensions of the Genetic Engineering of Animals for Human Consumption. [REVIEW] AI and Society 20 (1):82-102.score: 216.0
    Research at the intersections of feminism, biology and philosophy provides dynamic starting grounds for this discussion of genetic technologies and animals. With a focus on animal bodies, I will examine moral implications of the genetic engineering of “domesticated” animals—primarily pigs and chickens—for the purposes of human consumption. Concepts of natural and artificial, contamination and purity, integrity and fragmentation and mind and body will feature in the discussion. In this respect, Margaret Atwood’s novel, Oryx and Crake, serves as (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. R. De Vries (2006). Ethical Concepts Regarding the Genetic Engineering of Laboratory Animals. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 9 (2):211-225.score: 216.0
    Intrinsic value and animal integrity are two key concepts in the debate on the ethics of the genetic engineering of laboratory animals. These concepts have, on the one hand, a theoretical origin and are, on the other hand, based on the moral beliefs of people not directly involved in the genetic modification of animals. This ‘external’ origin raises the question whether these concepts need to be adjusted or extended when confronted with the moral experiences and opinions of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Peter Schaber, Klaus Peter Rippe & Philipp Balzer (2000). Two Concepts of Dignity for Humans and Non-Human Organisms in the Context of Genetic Engineering. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (1):7-27.score: 216.0
    The 1992 incorporation of an article by referendum in the SwissConstitution mandating that the federal government issue regulations onthe use of genetic material that take into account the dignity ofnonhuman organism raises philosophical questions about how we shouldunderstand what is meant by ``the dignity of nonhuman animals,'' andabout what sort of moral demands arise from recognizing this dignitywith respect to their genetic engineering. The first step in determiningwhat is meant is to clarify the difference between dignity when (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Roberta M. Berry (2007). The Ethics of Genetic Engineering. Routledge.score: 216.0
    Genetic engineering: past and present as prelude to the future -- Utilitarianism and engineering to maximize welfare -- Deontology: engineering at the edges of disease, disability, difference, and death -- Virtue ethics and engineering for the virtues -- Genetic engineering, fractious problems, and a navigational approach to policymaking.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Stewart Lockie (2006). Capturing the Sustainability Agenda: Organic Foods and Media Discourses on Food Scares, Environment, Genetic Engineering, and Health. [REVIEW] Agriculture and Human Values 23 (3):313-323.score: 216.0
    This paper undertakes a content analysis of newspaper articles from Australia, the UK, and the US concerned with a variety of issues relevant to sustainable food and agriculture from 1996 to 2002. It then goes on to identify the various ways in which sustainability, organic food and agriculture, genetic engineering, genetically modified foods, and food safety are framed both in their own terms and in relation to each other. It finds that despite the many competing approaches to sustainability (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Kristina Hubbard & Neva Hassanein (2013). Confronting Coexistence in the United States: Organic Agriculture, Genetic Engineering, and the Case of Roundup Ready® Alfalfa. [REVIEW] Agriculture and Human Values 30 (3):325-335.score: 198.0
    In agriculture, the principle of coexistence refers to a condition where different primary production systems can exist in the vicinity of each other, and can be managed in such a way that they affect each other as little as possible. Coexistence policies aim to ensure that farmers are able to freely grow the crops they choose—be they genetically engineered (GE), non-GE conventional, or organic. In the United States (US), the issue of coexistence has very recently come into sharp relief with (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Andrew Edgar (2009). The Hermeneutic Challenge of Genetic Engineering: Habermas and the Transhumanists. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 12 (2):157-167.score: 195.0
    The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact that developments in transhumanist technologies may have upon human cultures (and thus upon the lifeworld), and to do so by exploring a potential debate between Habermas and the transhumanists. Transhumanists, such as Nick Bostrom, typically see the potential in genetic and other technologies for positively expanding and transcending human nature. In contrast, Habermas is a representative of those who are fearful of this technology, suggesting that it will compound the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Tomasz Żuradzki (2008). Genetic Engineering and The Non-Identity Problem. Diametros 16:63-79.score: 195.0
    In my essay I consider the imaginary case of a future mother who refuses to undergo genetic alteration on her germline although she knows that her, as yet unconceived, child will have a serious genetic disorder. I analyze the good and bad points of two branches of arguments directed against her decision, consequentialist and rights-based. Then I discuss whether accepting one line of these arguments or the other makes a difference in moral assessment. I conclude that, although from (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Matthew L. Baum (2013). The Monoamine Oxidase A (MAOA) Genetic Predisposition to Impulsive Violence: Is It Relevant to Criminal Trials? Neuroethics 6 (2):287-306.score: 192.0
    In Italy, a judge reduced the sentence of a defendant by 1 year in response to evidence for a genetic predisposition to violence. The best characterized of these genetic differences, those in the monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), were cited as especially relevant. Several months previously in the USA, MAOA data contributed to a jury reducing charges from 1st degree murder (a capital offence) to voluntary manslaughter. Is there a rational basis for this type of use of MAOA evidence (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Robert A. Paoletti (1974). Selected Readings: Genetic Engineering and Bioethics. New York,Mss Information Corp..score: 189.0
    Social Values and Research in Human Embryology ROBERT G. EDWARDS and DAVID J. SHARP E 125 Babies by Means of In Vitro Fertilization: Unethical Experiments ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Robert Heeger (2000). Genetic Engineering and the Dignity of Creatures. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (1):43-51.score: 189.0
    The Swiss expert report suggests thatthe inherent dignity of a living being be identifiedwith its inherent value. But the phrase ``inherentvalue of a living being'' seems to connote two conceptsof inherent value. One has a morally obligatingcharacter but is counterintuitive because of itsegalitarianism. The other is one of non-moral value.It is more compatible with considered intuitions butinsufficient for substantiating the expert report'sclaim that human beings have moral duties towardsanimals and plants. The paper discusses theseconcepts. Consideration is then given to the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Lynn J. Frewer, Duncan Hedderley, Chaya Howard & Richard Shepherd (1997). 'Objection'mapping in Determining Group and Individual Concerns Regarding Genetic Engineering. Agriculture and Human Values 14 (1):67-79.score: 189.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Liebe F. Cavalieri (1981/1985). The Double-Edged Helix: Genetic Engineering in the Real World. Praeger.score: 189.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Scott Eastham (2003). Biotech Time-Bomb: How Genetic Engineering Could Irreversibly Change Our World. Rsvp Pub..score: 189.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Thomas A. Shannon (1997). Made in Whose Image?: Genetic Engineering and Christian Ethics. Humanities Press.score: 189.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. S. Matthew Liao (2008). Selecting Children: The Ethics of Reproductive Genetic Engineering. Philosophy Compass 3 (5):973-991.score: 162.0
    Advances in reproductive genetic engineering have the potential to transform human lives. Not only do they promise to allow us to select children free of diseases, they can also enable us to select children with desirable traits. In this paper, I consider two clusters of arguments for the moral permissibility of reproductive genetic engineering, what I call the Perfectionist View and the Libertarian View; and two clusters of arguments against reproductive genetic engineering, what I (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Matteo Mameli (2007). Reproductive Cloning, Genetic Engineering and the Autonomy of the Child: The Moral Agent and the Open Future. Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (2):87-93.score: 162.0
    Some authors have argued that the human use of reproductive cloning and genetic engineering should be prohibited because these biotechnologies would undermine the autonomy of the resulting child. In this paper, two versions of this view are discussed. According to the first version, the autonomy of cloned and genetically engineered people would be undermined because knowledge of the method by which these people have been conceived would make them unable to assume full responsibility for their actions. According to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. S. Matthew Liao (2005). The Ethics of Using Genetic Engineering for Sex Selection. Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (2):116-118.score: 162.0
    It is quite probable that one will soon be able to use genetic engineering to select the gender of one’s child by directly manipulating the sex of an embryo. Some might think that this method would be a more ethical method of sex selection than present technologies such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), since, unlike PGD, it does not need to create and destroy “wrong-gendered” embryos. This paper argues that those who object to present technologies on the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Ron Epstein, Ethical Dangers of Genetic Engineering.score: 162.0
    From the very first milk you suckle, your food is genetically engineered. The natural world is completely made over, invaded and distorted beyond recognition by genetically engineered trees, plants, animals, insects, bacteria, and viruses, both planned and run amok. Illnesses are very different too. Most of the old ones are gone or mutated into new forms, yet most people are suffering from genetically engineered pathogens, either used in biowarfare, or mistakenly released into the environment, or recombined in toxic form from (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Ron Epstein, Ethical and Spiritual Issues in Genetic Engineering.score: 162.0
    The choices I will be talking about have to do with biotechnology and genetic engineering, choices which we are currently not making consciously because we really don't know what is going on. I would like to tell you what is going on in these areas, and then talk about how we might approach this matter in ethical ways.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Dov Fox, Silver Spoons and Golden Genes: Genetic Engineering and the Egalitarian Ethos.score: 162.0
    This Article considers the moral and legal status of practices that aim to modify traits in human offspring. As advancements in reproductive biotechnology give parents greater power to shape the genetic constitution of their children, an emerging school of legal scholars has ushered in a privatized paradigm of genetic control. Commentators defend a constitutionally protected right to prenatal engineering by appeal to the significance of procreative liberty and the promise of producing future generations who are more likely (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Richard Dawkins, Where Do the Real Dangers of Genetic Engineering Lie?score: 162.0
    To listen to some people, you'd think genetically modified foods were radioactive. But genetic engineering is not, of itself, either bad or..
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Gavrell Ortiz & Sara Elizabeth (2004). Beyond Welfare: Animal Integrity, Animal Dignity, and Genetic Engineering. Ethics and the Environment 9 (1):94-120.score: 162.0
    : Bernard Rollin argues that it is permissible to change an animal's telos through genetic engineering, if it doesn't harm the animal's welfare. Recent attempts to undermine his argument rely either on the claim that diminishing certain capacities always harms an animal's welfare or on the claim that it always violates an animal's integrity. I argue that these fail. However, respect for animal dignity provides a defeasible reason not to engineer an animal in a way that inhibits the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. J. J. Delaney (2011). Possible People, Complaints, and the Distinction Between Genetic Planning and Genetic Engineering. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):410-414.score: 162.0
    Advances in the understanding of genetics have led to the belief that it may become possible to use genetic engineering to manipulate the DNA of humans at the embryonic stage to produce certain desirable traits. Although this currently cannot be done on a large scale, many people nevertheless object in principle to such practices. Most often, they argue that genetic enhancements would harm the children who were engineered, cause societal harms, or that the risks of perfecting the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Louis Marx Hall, The Ethics of Using Genetic Engineering for Sex Selection.score: 162.0
    It is quite probable that one will soon be able to use genetic engineering to select the gender of one’s child by directly manipulating the sex of an embryo. Some might think that this method would be a more ethical method of sex selection than present technologies such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), since, unlike PGD, it does not need to create and destroy “wrong-gendered” embryos. This paper argues that those who object to present technologies on the (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Lucas Alexander Haley Commons-Miller, Michael Lamport Commons & Geoffrey David Commons (2008). Genetic Engineering and the Speciation of Superions From Humans. World Futures 64 (5 - 7):436 – 443.score: 162.0
    Using ideas from evolution and postformal stages of hierarchical complexity, a hypothetical scenario, premised on genetic engineering advances, portrays the development of a new humanoid species, Superions. How would Superions impact and treat current humans? If the Superion scenario came to pass, it would be the ultimate genocidal terrorism of eliminating an entire species, Homo Sapiens. We speculate about defenses Homo Sapiens might mount. The tasks to relate two species (systems) constitutes a postformal, Metasystematic task. Developing a system (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Ilhan Ilkilic & Rainer Brömer (2009). Michael J. Sandel: The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering. [REVIEW] Medicine Studies 1 (2):183-185.score: 162.0
    Michael J. Sandel: The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering Content Type Journal Article Category Book Review Pages 183-185 DOI 10.1007/s12376-009-0018-4 Authors Ilhan Ilkilic, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Medical Center Institute for History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine Am Pulverturm 13 55131 Mainz Germany <span class='Hi'>Rainer</span> Brömer, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Medical Center Institute for History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine Am Pulverturm 13 55131 Mainz Germany Journal Medicine Studies Online ISSN 1876-4541 Print ISSN (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Robert Baker (2002). On Being a Bioethicist: A Review of John H. Evans Playing God?: Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate. [REVIEW] American Journal of Bioethics 2 (2):65-69.score: 162.0
    (2002). On Being a Bioethicist: A Review of John H. Evans Playing God?: Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate. The American Journal of Bioethics: Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 65-69.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Martin Gunderson (2006). Human Rights, Dignity, and the Science of Genetic Engineering. Social Philosophy Today 22:43-57.score: 162.0
    In the past decade several international declarations have called for banning reproductive non-therapeutic and germ-line engineering. Article 11 of UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights states that practices that are contrary to human dignity such as cloning of human beings should not be permitted. Article 12 of the same declaration restricts genetic applications to the relief from suffering and the improvement of health. The European Council has also taken a strong stand on germ-line (...) engineering in general and cloning in particular. Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine simply forbidsgerm-line engineering except for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes. The convention along with its explanatory report make it clear that the rationale for the decision is based, in large part, on the need to protect the dignity of persons.Several notions of dignity have been advanced to support bans on non-therapeutic germ-line engineering. I argue that they fail to provide a rationale for such a ban. I consider both secular and religious views of human dignity. In addition, I argue that there are forms of germ-line and non-therapeutic engineering that are compatible with human rights. (shrink)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. James J. Delaney (2010). Catholicism, the Human Form, and Genetic Engineering. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 84:75-87.score: 162.0
    In September of 2008, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published Dignitas Personae, which addresses several newly emerging topics in thearea of biomedical ethics. One of these topics is genetic engineering, which we can define as the intentional manipulation of genetic material so as to produce some desired trait or characteristic. Genetic engineering is discussed in Dignitas Personae, but is done so relatively briefly. In this paper, I explore some of the metaphysical and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Ron Epstein, A Modest Proposal Regarding Genetic Engineering in Mendocino County.score: 162.0
    The new millennium will be ushered in by the biotech century. The earlier we prepare the better. In the short term, we will be affected in these main areas: medical treatment; industrial, agricultural, and forest use; and food. First, let us take a brief look at some problems with the use of genetic engineering in agriculture and in our food. Then I would like to make some simple suggestions about steps we can take to assess the situation here (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. S. Matthew Liao (2005). The Ethics of Using Genetic Engineering for Sex Selection. Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (2):116-118.score: 162.0
    It is quite likely that parents will soon be able to use genetic engineering to select the sex of their child by directly manipulating the sex of an embryo. Some might think that this method would be a more ethical method of sex selection than present technologies such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) because, unlike PGD, it does not need to create and destroy “wrong gendered” embryos. This paper argues that those who object to present technologies on (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000