About this topic
Summary This category is about the possibility of altering the characteristics of non human animals and plants through genetic engineering. Among those who believe that genetic engineering is wrong, some regard genetic engineering to be wrong per se and some focus on its consequences. If it is wrong per se, it might be because (1) it violates the rights of animals, (2) it fails to accord to animals the respect that is their due, (3) it is unnatural, i.e. it violates the "telos" of animals. 
Key works Rollin 1995 rejects genetic engineering based on consequentialist considerations. Rifkin 1985, Fox 1990, Fox 1992, and Dobson 1995 argue, from a biocentric perspective, that genetic engineering is wrong per se.
Introductions Burgess & Walsh 1998
Related

Contents
354 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 354
  1. Genetic Engineering, Nature Conservation, and Animal Ethics in advance.Leonie N. Bossert & Thomas Potthast - forthcoming - Environmental Ethics.
    The use of genetic engineering is increasingly discussed for nature conservation. At the same time, recent animal ethics approaches debate whether humans should genetically engineer wild animals to improve their welfare. This paper examines if obligations towards wild sentient animals require humans to genetically engineering wild animals, while arguing that there is no moral need to do so. The focus is on arguments from animal ethics, but they are linked to conservation ethics, highlighting the often neglected overlap between the two (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Genetic Engineering of Food.Derek Burke - forthcoming - Christians and Bioethics.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. A dark side of glowing fish? More oversight of genetic engineering needed.A. Caplan - forthcoming - Bioethics on Msnbc.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Enhancement & Desert.Thomas Douglas - forthcoming - Politics, Philosophy and Economics.
    It is sometimes claimed that those who succeed with the aid of enhancement technologies deserve the rewards associated with their success less, other things being equal, than those who succeed without the aid of such technologies. This claim captures some widely held intuitions, has been implicitly endorsed by participants in social-psychological research, and helps to undergird some otherwise puzzling philosophical objections to the use of enhancement technologies. I consider whether it can be provided with a rational basis. I examine three (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. Genetic disenhancement and xenotransplantation: diminishing pigs’ capacity to experience suffering through genetic engineering.Daniel Rodger, Daniel J. Hurst, Christopher A. Bobier & Xavier Symons - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics.
    One objection to xenotransplantation is that it will require the large-scale breeding, raising and killing of genetically modified pigs. The pigs will need to be raised in designated pathogen-free facilities and undergo a range of medical tests before having their organs removed and being euthanised. As a result, they will have significantly shortened life expectancies, will experience pain and suffering and be subject to a degree of social and environmental deprivation. To minimise the impact of these factors, we propose the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Social, economical, environmental, ethical and political outcomes of biotechnology and genetic engineering.A. Yilmaz - forthcoming - Bioethics Congress.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Creating Future People: The Science and Ethics of Genetic Enhancement (2nd edition).Jonathan Anomaly - 2024 - London, UK: Routledge.
  8. “Frequently Asked Questions” About Genetic Engineering in Farm Animals: A Frame Analysis.Katherine E. Koralesky, Heidi J. S. Tworek, Marina A. G. von Keyserlingk & Daniel M. Weary - 2024 - Food Ethics 9 (1):1-20.
    Calls for public engagement on emerging agricultural technologies, including genetic engineering of farm animals, have resulted in the development of information that people can interact and engage with online, including “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQs) developed by organizations seeking to inform or influence the debate. We conducted a frame analysis of FAQs webpages about genetic engineering of farm animals developed by different organizations to describe how questions and answers are presented. We categorized FAQs as having a regulatory frame (emphasizing or challenging (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9. Creating human nature: the political challenges of genetic engineering Creating human nature: the political challenges of genetic engineering, by Benjamin Gregg, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2022, pp. 262, $105.00, ISBN 9781108841160. [REVIEW]Adam Omelianchuk - 2024 - The New Bioethics 30 (1):83-88.
    Benjamin Gregg’s Creating Human Nature: The Political Challenges of Genetic Engineering is a wide-ranging and controversial approach to the politics of genetic engineering. The book consists of thr...
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. Comparative ethical evaluation of epigenome editing and genome editing in medicine: first steps and future directions.Karla Alex & Eva C. Winkler - 2023 - Journal of Medical Ethics (doi: 10.1136/jme-2022-108888):1-9.
    Targeted modifications of the human epigenome, epigenome editing (EE), are around the corner. For EE, techniques similar to genome editing (GE) techniques are used. While in GE the genetic information is changed by directly modifying DNA, intervening in the epigenome requires modifying the configuration of DNA, for example, how it is folded. This does not come with alterations in the base sequence (‘genetic code’). To date, there is almost no ethical debate about EE, whereas the discussions about GE are voluminous. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  11. Faire évoluer les virus vers des formes plus pathogènes, est-ce vraiment raisonnable ?Antoine Danchin - 2023 - Raison Présente 228 (4):35-43.
    Anticiper les épidémies est le souhait le plus vif de toutes les institutions qui veillent sur la santé publique. Un raisonnement naïf permet de penser qu’il suffit de faire évoluer en laboratoire un organisme potentiellement pathogène pour savoir comment sa descendance pourra devenir plus virulente pour l’homme. Il est alors facile de faire croître cet organisme sur des cellules humaines, qu’il infecte mal pour commencer, puis de retenir ses descendants au fur et à mesure qu’ils deviennent plus infectieux. La vision (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Genetic Engineering Revolution.Benjamin Gregg - 2023 - In Nathanaël Wallenhorst & Christoph Wulf (eds.), Handbook of the Anthropocene. Springer. pp. 505-510.
    Genetic engineering in general, and human genetic editing in particular, is revolutionizing humankind’s self-understanding: an evolved organism taking ever greater control of its own evolution. This Anthropocenic phenomenon is deeply equivocal (Gregg B. Human genetic engineering: biotic justice in the anthropocene? In: DellaSala D, Goldstein M (eds) Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene, vol 4. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 351–359, 2018). While delivering humans from some risks, it renders them vulnerable to unintended consequences as well. Even in the face of seemingly intractable differences (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Creating human nature: the political challenges of genetic engineering.Adam Omelianchuk PhD - 2023 - The New Bioethics 30 (1):83-88.
    Volume 30, Issue 1, March 2024, Page 83-88.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. The Duty to Edit the Human Germline.Parker Crutchfield - 2022 - Res Publica 29 (3):347-365.
    Many people find the manipulation of the human germline—editing the DNA of sperm or egg cells such that these genetic changes are passed to the resulting offspring—to be morally impermissible. In this paper, I argue for the claim that editing the human germline is morally permissible. My argument starts with the claim that outcome uncertainty regarding the effects of germline editing shows that the duty to not harm cannot ground the prohibition of germline editing. Instead, if germline editing is wrong, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. The principle of procreative beneficence and its implications for genetic engineering.Luvuyo Gantsho - 2022 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 43 (5):307-328.
    Molecular genetic engineering technologies such as CRISPR/Cas9 have made the accurate and safe genetic engineering of human embryos possible. Further advances in genomics have isolated genes that predict qualities and traits associated with intelligence. Given these advances, prospective parents could use these biotechnologies to genetically engineer future children for genes that enhance their intelligence. While Julian Savulescu’s Principle of Procreative Beneficence (PPB) argues for the moral obligation of prospective parents to use in-vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic diagnosis to make eugenic (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. Empirical bioethics and human enhancement: a methodological proposal.Piero Gayozzo - 2022 - Revista Colombiana de Bioética 17 (2):e3501.
    Purpose/Background. The present research focuses on the debate on transhumanism/bioconservatism from the perspective of empirical bioethics, that is, making use of em-pirical evidence in the process of moral reasoning. Its objective is to propose a metho-dological guide for the approach and resolution of moral problems concerning human enhancement. Methodology/Approach. The method Step-wise Ethical Human Enhancemet (SWEH) is proposed. It is a guide consisting of 11 questions that are the result of the adaptation of the guidelines for identifying a human enhancement (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Creating Human Nature: The Political Challenges of Genetic Engineering.Benjamin Gregg - 2022 - Cambridge University Press.
    Human genetic enhancement, examined from the standpoint of the new field of political bioethics, displaces the age-old question of truth: What is human nature? This book displaces that question with another: What kind of human nature should humans want to create for themselves? To answer that question, this book answers two others: What constraints should limit the applications of rapidly developing biotechnologies? What could possibly form the basis for corresponding public policy in a democratic society? Benjamin Gregg focuses on the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  18. Dynamic Aspects of Human Genetics: Is the Human Germline the Bioethical Key to Human Genetic Engineering?Nicolae Morar - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (9):46-49.
    The advent of CRISPR has drastically moved the possibility of genetically modifying human genomes from the space of science fiction into nearby reality. Whether one considers the positive results f...
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Debating the “Unresolved Potential Dangers of Genetic Engineering”. Public Science, Strategies of Enactment and Performance of Science in the Context of the West German Debate of Genetic Engineering.Anna Maria Schmidt - 2022 - NTM Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften, Technik und Medizin 30 (4):501-527.
    In March 1986, a public symposium took place in Heidelberg about the “unresolved potential dangers of genetic engineering”. The event was organized by institutions affiliated with the environmental movement. Choosing this symposium as an example, the article shows how the public appearance of scientists can be understood as a form of political activism. The article shows how specialists from fields as diverse as biology, chemistry, physics, law and political sciences tried to place political messages by putting themselves in the limelight (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20. Designing Genetic Engineering Technologies For Human Values.Steven Umbrello - 2022 - Etica E Politica (2):481-510.
    Genetic engineering technologies are a subclass of the biotechnology family, and are concerned with the use of laboratory-based technologies to intervene with a given organism at the genetic level, i.e., the level of its DNA. This class of technologies could feasibly be used to treat diseases and disabilities, create disease-resistant crops, or even be used to enhance humans to make them more resistant to certain environmental conditions. However, both therapeutic and enhancement applications of genetic engineering raise serious ethical concerns. This (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. From iconic species to swimming vegetable: CRISPR as the new frontier in the domestication of salmon.Hannah Winther - 2022 - In Donald Bruce & Ann Bruce (eds.), Transforming Food Systems: Ethics, Innovation and Responsibility. Brill Wageningen Academic. pp. 440 - 445.
    Gene editing technologies such as CRISPR hold the promise to solve many of the challenges in industrial salmon farming. However, for the technology to be taken into use, it has to be deemed socially and morally acceptable. Whereas older gene modification technologies have been met with much public resistance, there are hopes that CRISPR might change the debate, since it does not require inserting genes from other organisms and can therefore be considered less invasive and more natural. Though the concept (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. Reasons to Genome Edit and Metaphysical Essentialism about Human Identity.Tomasz Żuradzki & Vilius Dranseika - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (9):34-36.
    In this commentary paper, we are taking one step further in questioning the central assumptions in the bioethical debates about reproductive technologies. We argue that the very distinction between “person affecting” and “identity affecting” interventions is based on a questionable form of material-origin essentialism. Questioning of this form of essentialist approach to human identity allows treating genome editing and genetic selection as more similar than they are taken to be in the standard approaches. It would also challenge the idea that (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  23. Ethischer Diskurs zu Epigenetik und Genomeditierung: die Gefahr eines (epi-)genetischen Determinismus und naturwissenschaftlich strittiger Grundannahmen.Karla Karoline Sonne Kalinka Alex & Eva C. Winkler - 2021 - In Boris Fehse, Ferdinand Hucho, Sina Bartfeld, Stephan Clemens, Tobias Erb, Heiner Fangerau, Jürgen Hampel, Martin Korte, Lilian Marx-Stölting, Stefan Mundlos, Angela Osterheider, Anja Pichl, Jens Reich, Hannah Schickl, Silke Schicktanz, Jochen Taupitz, Jörn Walter, Eva Winkler & Martin Zenke (eds.), Fünfter Gentechnologiebericht: Sachstand und Perspektiven für Forschung und Anwendung. pp. 299-323.
    Slightly modified excerpt from the section 13.4 Zusammenfassung und Ausblick (translated into englisch): This chapter is based on an analysis of ethical debates on epigenetics and genome editing, debates, in which ethical arguments relating to future generations and justice play a central role. The analysis aims to contextualize new developments in genetic engineering, such as genome and epigenome editing, ethically. At the beginning, the assumptions of "genetic determinism," on which "genetic essentialism" is based, of "epigenetic determinism" as well as "genetic" (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24. Ethical Discourse on Epigenetics and Genome Editing: The Risk of (Epi-) genetic Determinism and Scientifically Controversial Basic Assumptions.Karla Alex & Eva C. Winkler - 2021 - In Michael Welker, Eva Winkler & John Witte Jr (eds.), The Impact of Health Care on Character Formation, Ethical Education, and the Communication of Values in Late Modern Pluralistic Societies. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt & Wipf & Stock Publishers. pp. 77-99.
    Excerpt: 1. Introduction This chapter provides insight into the diverse ethical debates on genetics and epigenetics. Much controversy surrounds debates about intervening into the germline genome of human embryos, with catchwords such as genome editing, designer baby, and CRISPR/Cas. The idea that it is possible to design a child according to one’s personal preferences is, however, a quite distorted view of what is actually possible with new gene technologies and gene therapies. These are much more limited than the editing and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Affecting future individuals: Why and when germline genome editing entails a greater moral obligation towards progeny.Davide Battisti - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (5):1-9.
    Assisted reproductive technologies have greatly increased our control over reproductive choices, leading some bioethicists to argue that we face unprecedented moral obligations towards progeny. Several models attempting to balance the principle of procreative autonomy with these obligations have been proposed. The least demanding is the minimal threshold model (MTM), according to which every reproductive choice is permissible, except creating children whose lives will not be worth living. Hence, as long as the future child is likely to have a life worth (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  26. The Challenge of Genetic Engineering to the Spirituality and Morality of Human Destiny in the Traditional Yoruba Concept of Àdáyébá.Babajide Olugbenga Dasaolu - 2021 - Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics 12 (3):16-25.
    With the colossal strides recorded in the arena of Genetic Engineering, conviction in Orí, among traditional Yorùbás, as the bearer of an individual’s destiny and life course among the Yorùbá wanes. Through critical analysis and hermeneutical interpretation, the present study scrutinizes the relation between physiognomy and destiny in traditional Yorùbá idea of Orí. The cumulative traditional Yorùbá allegorical account depicts Òrìṣàńlá as the primordial divinity casting Ara (human body) from clay or sand; Olódùmarè, the Higher God, providing Ẹ̀mí (life-force) and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. For Faster Science: Accelerated Genetic Engineering.Amitai Etzioni - 2021 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 32 (4):349-357.
    While acknowledging that there are many risks associated with genetic engineering, this article asserts that delaying the research and development of genetic engineering has high human costs. Genetic engineering could prevent millions of premature deaths, eliminate the suffering associated with many diseases and conditions, and save millions of family members from the anguish of watching their loved ones suffer and die from genetic conditions. Societal deliberations on the topic of genetic engineering have existed for decades, and a majority of people (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Autonomy and the Limits of Cognitive Enhancement.Jonathan Lewis - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (1):15-22.
    In the debates regarding the ethics of human enhancement, proponents have found it difficult to refute the concern, voiced by certain bioconservatives, that cognitive enhancement violates the autonomy of the enhanced. However, G. Owen Schaefer, Guy Kahane and Julian Savulescu have attempted not only to avoid autonomy-based bioconservative objections, but to argue that cognition-enhancing biomedical interventions can actually enhance autonomy. In response, this paper has two aims: firstly, to explore the limits of their argument; secondly, and more importantly, to develop (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  29. Making Dialogue Work: Responsible Innovation and Gene Editing.Phil Macnaghten, Esha Shah & David Ludwig - 2021 - In David Ludwig, Birgit Boogaard, Phil Macnaghten & Cees Leeuwis (eds.), The politics of knowledge in inclusive development and innovation. Routledge.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Rethinking the oversight conditions of human–animal chimera research.Monika Piotrowska - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (1):98-104.
    New discoveries are improving the odds of human cells surviving in host animals, prompting regulatory and funding agencies to issue calls for additional layers of ethical oversight for certain types of human–animal chimeras. Of interest are research proposals involving chimeric animals with humanized brains. But what is motivating the demand for additional oversight? I locate two, not obviously compatible, motivations, each of which provides the justificatory basis for paying special attention to different sets of human–animal chimeras. Surprisingly, the sets of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. Informed Consent: Foundations and Applications.Joanna Smolenski - 2021 - Dissertation, Cuny Graduate Center
    Since its advent in the 20th century, informed consent has become a cornerstone of ethical healthcare, and obtaining it a core obligation in medical contexts. In my dissertation, I aim to examine the theoretical underpinnings of informed consent and identify what values it is taken to protect. I will suggest that the fundamental motivation behind informed consent rests in something I’ll call bodily self-sovereignty, which I argue involves a coupling of two groups of values: autonomy and non-domination on the one (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  32. Can ‘eugenics’ be defended?Walter Veit, J. Anomaly, N. Agar, P. Singer, D. Fleischman & F. Minerva - 2021 - Bioethics Review 39 (1):60–67.
    In recent years, bioethical discourse around the topic of ‘genetic enhancement’ has become increasingly politicized. We fear there is too much focus on the semantic question of whether we should call particular practices and emerging bio-technologies such as CRISPR ‘eugenics’, rather than the more important question of how we should view them from the perspective of ethics and policy. Here, we address the question of whether ‘eugenics’ can be defended and how proponents and critics of enhancement should engage with each (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33. Eugenics Offended.Robert A. Wilson - 2021 - Monash Bioethics Review 39 (2):169-176.
    This commentary continues an exchange on eugenics in Monash Bioethics Review between Anomaly (2018), Wilson (2019), and Veit, Anomaly, Agar, Singer, Fleischman, and Minerva (2021). The eponymous question, “Can ‘Eugenics’ be Defended?”, is multiply ambiguous and does not receive a clear answer from Veit et al.. Despite their stated desire to move beyond mere semantics to matters of substance, Veit et al. concentrate on several uses of the term “eugenics” that pull in opposite directions. I argue, first, that Veit et (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  34. Against the Precautionary Approach to Moral Status: The Case of Surrogates for Living Human Brains.Tomasz Żuradzki - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (1):53-56.
    My paper builds on the conceptual tools from three interrelated philosophical debates that—as I believe—may help structure important if chaotic discussions about surrogates for living human brains and resolve some practical issues related to regulatory matters. In particular, I refer to the discussions about the “moral precautionary principle” in research ethics (Koplin and Wilkinson 2019); about normative uncertainty in ethics (MacAskill, Bykvist, and Ord 2020), and about the inductive risk problem for animal welfare scientists (Birch 2018). I elucidate upon the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  35. The Future of Phage: Ethical challenges of using phage viruses to treat bacterial infections.Jonathan Anomaly - 2020 - Public Health Ethics 13.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. Cognitive Enhancement and Network Effects: How Individual Prosperity Depends on Group Traits.Jonathan Anomaly & Garett Jones - 2020 - Philosophia 48:1753-1768.
  37. Great Minds Think Different: Preserving Cognitive Diversity in an Age of Gene Editing.Jonny Anomaly, Julian Savulescu & Christopher Gyngell - 2020 - Bioethics 34 (1):81-89.
  38. Navigating the Future in a Sea of Crispr Uncertainty.Constance M. Bertka - 2020 - Zygon 55 (2):444-458.
    Humanity's toolkit for altering the world we live in now includes CRISPR. Through an evolutionary process, bacteria acquired a way to protect themselves from an invading virus, making their immediate future more secure. In human hands, this powerful genome‐editing tool offers the potential to impact, at a breathtaking rate, not only our own evolutionary future, but the future of other life on this planet. Ethical concerns about altering genomes are not new, but the birth of two CRISPR gene‐edited babies last (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Altered Inheritance: CRISPR and the Ethics of Human Genome Editing.Donna Dickenson - 2020 - The New Bioethics 26 (1):75-77.
    Review of Francoise Baylis, Altered Inheritance: CRISPR and the Ethics of Human Genome Editing (2019).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  40. The theological debate over human enhancement: An empirical case study of a mediating organization.John H. Evans - 2020 - Zygon 55 (3):615-637.
    For most theologians, theology should ultimately be used by the laity and/or the public. However, the religion and science debate has not focused on the divide between theologians and the laity. In this case study I examine the debate among theologians about human enhancement. I focus on the extent to which the structure of the debate in a “mediating organization” between the theologians and the public coincides with the structure of the debate among the theologians. I conduct a survey of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. Wild Animal Ethics: The Moral and Political Problem of Wild Animal Suffering.Kyle Johannsen - 2020 - New York, NY, USA: Routledge.
    Though many ethicists have the intuition that we should leave nature alone, Kyle Johannsen argues that we have a duty to research safe ways of providing large-scale assistance to wild animals. Using concepts from moral and political philosophy to analyze the issue of wild animal suffering (WAS), Johannsen explores how a collective, institutional obligation to assist wild animals should be understood. He claims that with enough research, genetic editing may one day give us the power to safely intervene without perpetually (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  42. How to Play the “Playing God” Card.Moti Mizrahi - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (3):1445-1461.
    When the phrase “playing God” is used in debates concerning the use of new technologies, such as cloning or genetic engineering, it is usually interpreted as a warning not to interfere with God’s creation or nature. I think that this interpretation of “playing God” arguments as a call to non-interference with nature is too narrow. In this paper, I propose an alternative interpretation of “playing God” arguments. Taking an argumentation theory approach, I provide an argumentation scheme and accompanying critical questions (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  43. Can reproductive genetic manipulation save lives?G. Owen Schaefer - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy (3):381-386.
    It has recently been argued that reproductive genetic manipulation technologies like mitochondrial replacement and germline CRISPR modifications cannot be said to save anyone’s life because, counterfactually, no one would suffer more or die sooner absent the intervention. The present article argues that, on the contrary, reproductive genetic manipulations may be life-saving (and, from this, have therapeutic value) under an appropriate population health perspective. As such, popular reports of reproductive genetic manipulations potentially saving lives or preventing disease are not necessarily mistaken, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  44. Genome editing: slipping down toward Eugenics?Davide Battisti - 2019 - Medicina Historica 3 (3):206-218.
    In this paper, I will present the empirical version of the slippery slope argument (SSA) in the field of genome editing. According to the SSA, if we adopt germline manipulation of embryos we will eventually end up performing or allowing something morally reprehensible, such as new coercive eugenics. I will investigate the actual possibility of sliding towards eugenics: thus, I will examine enhancement and eugenics both in the classical and liberal versions, through the lens of SSA. In the first part, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  45. Can Attitudes Toward Genome Editing Better Inform Cognitive Enhancement Policy?Davide Battisti, Alessandra Gasparetto & Mario Picozzi - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 10 (1):59-61.
    The article by Conrad et al. (AJOB Neuroscience, 2019, 10:1) does not take into account another, still hypothetical, procedure for cognitive enhancement (CE) which would be appropriate to consider in the surveys, i.e. the possibility to genetically enhance the cognitive abilities of a future individual using genome editing techniques. In this case, the conclusions of the article in the context of the “self-others difference” and “safety/naturalness” would be questioned. In fact, the results of the hypothetical surveys with the variant “genome (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46. The ethical landscape of gene drive research.Daniel Edward Callies - 2019 - Bioethics 33 (9):1091-1097.
    Gene drive technology has immense potential. The ability to bypass the laws of Mendelian inheritance and almost ensure the transmission of specific genetic material to future generations creates boundless possibilities. But alongside these boundless possibilities are major social and ethical issues. This article aims to introduce gene drive technology, some of its potential applications, and some of the social and ethical issues that arise during research into the technology. For example, is investigation into gene drives hubristic? Would applications of gene (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  47. Improving the justice‐based argument for conducting human gene editing research to cure sickle cell disease.Berman Chan - 2019 - Bioethics 34 (2):200-202.
    In a recent article, Marilyn Baffoe-Bonnie offers three arguments for conducting CRISPR/Cas9 biotechnology research to cure sickle-cell disease (SCD) based on addressing historical and current injustices in SCD research and care. I show that her second and third arguments suffer from roughly the same defect, which is that they really argue for something else rather than for conducting CRISPR/Cas9 research in particular. For instance, the second argument argues that conducting this gene therapy research would improve the relationship between SCD sufferers (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48. Commentary: Setting the Bar Higher.Nicolas Delon - 2019 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28 (1):40-45.
    Commentary on Neuhaus and Parent, 'Gene doping--In Animals?' (2019).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49. Did a permissive scientific culture encourage the 'CRISPR babies' experiment?Donna Dickenson & Marcy Darnovsky - 2019 - Nature Biotechnology 27:350-369.
    We review the Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2018 report on germline gene editing and show how its shortcomings are part of an increasingly permissive climate among elite scientists that may well have emboldened the Chinese 'CRISPR babies' experiment. Without a robust and meaningful airing of the perils of human germline modification, these views are likely to encourage additional, more mainstream moves in the same dangerous direction.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50. Cloning Centering at Egoism.Yusuke Kaneko - 2019 - The Basis : The Annual Bulletin of Research Center for Liberal Education 9:245-260.
    Cloning research caught a great deal of attention when Dolly the sheep was born (§4). While some fear surrounded the attainment (§§14-15), Wilmutʼs research itself has grown well, providing a less vicious manner to gain ES cells (§12). In this article, we review the progress of cloning research along with the concern of medical circles about its application to reproductive cloning, that is to say, making replicas of human beings (§§16-21). Note that all the content is ascribed to the author (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 354