Is Human Enhancement also a Personal Matter?

Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):161-177 (2013)
Abstract
Emerging technologies are increasingly used in an attempt to “enhance the human body and/or mind” beyond the contemporary standards that characterize human beings. Yet, such standards are deeply controversial and it is not an easy task to determine whether the application of a given technology to an individual and its outcome can be defined as a human enhancement or not. Despite much debate on its potential or actual ethical and social impacts, human enhancement is not subject to any consensual definition. This paper proposes a timely and much needed examination of the various definitions found in the literature. We classify these definitions into four main categories: the implicit approach, the therapy-enhancement distinction, the improvement of general human capacities and the increase of well-being. After commenting on these different approaches and their limitations, we propose a definition of human enhancement that focuses on individual perceptions. While acknowledging that a definition that mainly depends on personal and subjective individual perceptions raises many challenges, we suggest that a comprehensive approach to define human enhancement could constitute a useful premise to appropriately address the complexity of the ethical and social issues it generates
Keywords Biomedical enhancement  Enhancement technologies  Genetic engineering  Ethical issues
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11948-011-9294-y
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,685
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
The Case Against Perfection.Michael Sandel - 2004 - The Atlantic (April):1–11.
Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction.Norman Daniels - 2000 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9 (3):309--322.
The Individualist Model of Autonomy and the Challenge of Disability.Anita Ho - 2008 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (2/3):193-207.

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Can Human Genetic Enhancement Be Prohibited?William Gardner - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (1):65-84.
Thinking Across Species—a Critical Bioethics Approach to Enhancement.Richard Twine - 2007 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (6):509-523.
Making Humans Better and Making Better Humans.Mairi Levitt & Fiona K. O'Neill - 2010 - Genomics, Society and Policy 6 (1):1-14.
Moral Enhancement.Thomas Douglas - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.
Moral Enhancement and Freedom.John Harris - 2011 - Bioethics 25 (2):102-111.
Human Enhancement : Ethical Issues in Human Enhancement.Nick Bostrom & Rebecca Roache - 2007 - In Jesper Ryberg, Thomas S. Petersen & Clark Wolf (eds.), New Waves in Applied Ethics. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Genetic Enhancement: Plan Now to Act Later.Maxwell J. Mehlman - 2005 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (1):77-82.
Cognitive Enhancement: Methods, Ethics, Regulatory Challenges. [REVIEW]Nick Bostrom - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (3):311-341.
Against Unrestricted Human Enhancement.Patrick Lin & Fritz Allhoff - 2008 - Journal of Evolution and Technology 18 (1):35-41.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2011-07-23

Total downloads

56 ( #92,433 of 2,158,287 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

6 ( #53,335 of 2,158,287 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums