Is Human Enhancement also a Personal Matter?

Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):161-177 (2013)

Authors
Beatrice Godard
Université de Montréal
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)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11948-011-9294-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 46,425
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Case Against Perfection.Michael J. 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.
Justice, Fairness, and Enhancement.Julian Savulescu - 2006 - Annals of New York Academy of Science 1093:321-338.

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Amélioration humaine.Carole Berset - 2015 - Swiss Philosophical Preprints.

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 Human 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.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-07-23

Total views
98 ( #88,378 of 2,286,305 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #196,066 of 2,286,305 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature