Bioconservatism, Partiality, and the Human-Nature Objection to Enhancement

The Monist 99 (4):406-422 (2016)

Authors
Guy Kahane
Oxford University
Jonathan Pugh
Oxford University
Julian Savulescu
Oxford University
Abstract
“Bioconservatives” in the human enhancement debate endorse the conservative claim that we should reject the use of biotechnologies that enhance natural human capacities. However, they often ground their objections to enhancement with contestable claims about human nature that are also in tension with other common tenets of conservatism. We argue that bioconservatives could raise a more plausible objection to enhancement by invoking a strain of conservative thought developed by G.A. Cohen. Although Cohen’s conservatism is not sufficient to fully revive the bioconservative objection, we argue that it can be supplemented by an account of reasonable partiality for humanity in a way that provides further support to the bioconservative position in a manner congruous with broader conservatism. We propose that the idea of partiality to humanity can buttress the bioconservative objection into its strongest possible form. However, we conclude by arguing that, even in this form, the objection cannot do all the work that bioconservatives expect of it.
Keywords Enhancement  Bioconservatism  Partiality  Human Nature  Conservatism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/monist/onw013
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality.Peter Railton - 1984 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
Love as Valuing a Relationship.Niko Kolodny - 2003 - Philosophical Review 112 (2):135-189.

View all 31 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Mastery Without Mystery: Why There is No Promethean Sin in Enhancement.Guy Kahane - 2011 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (4):355-368.
In Defense of Posthuman Dignity.Nick Bostrom - 2005 - Bioethics 19 (3):202–214.
Human Nature and Enhancement.Allen Buchanan - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (3):141-150.
The Ethics of Human Enhancement.Alberto Giubilini & Sagar Sanyal - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (4):233-243.
Genetic Enhancement, Human Nature, and Rights.T. Mcconnell - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (4):415-428.
A Thomistic Appraisal of Human Enhancement Technologies.Jason T. Eberl - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (4):289-310.
Bioconservatism, Bioliberalism, and Repugnance.Rebecca Roache & Steve Clarke - 2009 - Monash Bioethics Review 28 (1):04.1-04.21.
Enhancement Technologies and the Person: Christian Perspectives.Andrew Lustig - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (1):41-50.
Human Enhancement, Social Solidarity and the Distribution of Responsibility.John Danaher - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):359-378.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-06-26

Total views
97 ( #88,949 of 2,285,426 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #37,804 of 2,285,426 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature