Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (7):457-458 (2019)

Authors
Abstract
Our recent article begins by describing a new technique for creating human–animal chimeras. This technique—known as interspecies blastocyst complementation—may enable us to generate human organs inside of human–pig chimeras. One central concern about farming human–pig chimeras for their organs is that their moral status would be uncertain and potentially significant. Our article is partly, but not only, about such concerns. At the heart of our paper are two broader questions. First, how should we treat beings of uncertain moral status? And second, do our reasons for thinking that human–pig chimeras have uncertain moral status also provide reason to think regular, non-chimeric pigs have uncertain moral status? We thank Mike King, Christian Munthe, David Resnik, Per Sandin and Rob Streiffer for their commentaries on our paper, each of which serves to clarify the ethical issues at play. In this response, we want to respond to one criticism, acknowledge the force of several others, and point towards some philosophical work that remains to be done. First, the criticism. Resnik questions the parallel we draw between human–pig chimeras and regular pigs. In the case of regular pigs, there is currently a social consensus that it is morally acceptable to farm pigs for food. For Resnik, this consensus imposes a special burden on those who wish to argue against it; ‘one needs substantial evidence that the majority view is wrong’.1 Since an equivalent consensus does not exist in relation to human–pig chimeras, one might think that moral uncertainty concerns have less force in the context of meat production than human–animal chimera research. We do not think the social consensus in favour …
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1136/medethics-2019-105644
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,159
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

At the Edge of Humanity: Human Stem Cells, Chimeras, and Moral Status.Robert Streiffer - 2005 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (4):347-370.
Implications of Moral Uncertainty: Implausible or Just Unpalatable?Mike King - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (7):451-452.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

At the Edge of Humanity: Human Stem Cells, Chimeras, and Moral Status.Robert Streiffer - 2005 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (4):347-370.
At the Edge of Humanity: Human Stem Cells, Chimeras, and Moral Status.Robert Streiffer - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):63-83.
The Moral Problem of Other Minds.Jeff Sebo - 2018 - The Harvard Review of Philosophy 25:51-70.
The Moral Status of Artificial Life.Bernard Baertschi - 2012 - Environmental Values 21 (1):5 - 18.
The Basis of Human Moral Status.S. Matthew Liao - 2010 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 7 (2):159-179.
Nonhuman Chimeras with Human Brain Cells.Eric Sotnak - 2007 - Between the Species 13 (7):8.
On the Notion of Moral Status and Personhood in Biomedical Ethics.Azam Golam - 2010 - The Dhaka Univrsity Studies 67 (1):83-96.
Human Nature and Moral Status in Bioethics.Matthew Shea - 2018 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 43 (2):115-131.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-07-12

Total views
11 ( #831,006 of 2,454,812 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,241 of 2,454,812 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes