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

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

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.

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 - 2008 - 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
2017-06-26

Downloads
395 (#48,932)

6 months
93 (#46,116)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Jonathan Pugh
University of Oxford
Guy Kahane
University of Oxford
Julian Savulescu
Oxford University

Citations of this work

Conservatism Reconsidered.David O'brien - 2022 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 8 (1):149-168.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Unfit for the Future: The Need for Moral Enhancement.Ingmar Persson & Julian Savulescu - 2012 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press UK. Edited by Julian Savulescu.
Alienation, consequentialism, and the demands of morality.Peter Railton - 1984 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
Persons, Character, and Morality.Bernard Williams - 1976 - In James Rachels (ed.), Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980. Cambridge University Press.

View all 35 references / Add more references