Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Egalitarianism and Moral Bioenhancement.Robert Sparrow - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (4):20-28.
    A number of philosophers working in applied ethics and bioethics are now earnestly debating the ethics of what they term “moral bioenhancement.” I argue that the society-wide program of biological manipulations required to achieve the purported goals of moral bioenhancement would necessarily implicate the state in a controversial moral perfectionism. Moreover, the prospect of being able to reliably identify some people as, by biological constitution, significantly and consistently more moral than others would seem to pose a profound challenge to egalitarian (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   49 citations  
  • On not taking men as they are: reflections on moral bioenhancement.Paula Casal - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (4):340-342.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Are Unequal Incarceration Rates Unjust to Men?Gina Schouten - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Imposing Genetic Diversity.Robert Sparrow - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (6):2-10.
    The idea that a world in which everyone was born “perfect” would be a world in which something valuable was missing often comes up in debates about the ethics of technologies of prenatal testing and preimplantation genetic diagnosis . This thought plays an important role in the “disability critique” of prenatal testing. However, the idea that human genetic variation is an important good with significant benefits for society at large is also embraced by a wide range of figures writing in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Genetic modification of characteristic masculine traits: enhancement or deformity?Jeff McMahan - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):736-740.
    Some philosophers, most notably Julian Savulescu, have argued that potential parents have a moral reason to do what they can to have a child with the highest expected level of well-being.1 This is not just a reason to do what will make a particular child better off than he or she would otherwise be but also a reason to choose, from among different possible children, the one that has the highest expected well-being. The claim that potential parents have such a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • What's wrong with enhancements?Larry S. Temkin - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):729-731.
    As I read Paula Casal's excellent paper, ‘Sexual Dimorphism and Human Enhancement,’1 three thoughts kept circulating through my mind. First, I found myself largely in agreement with virtually everything she wrote. In particular, if Casal was being accurate and fair in writing that ‘Robert Sparrow alleges that those who…advocate biomedical welfare enhancements are committed to selecting only female embryos because women live longer than men,’1 then she has given compelling reasons for believing that that claim is, on reflection, as ludicrous (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Sexism and human enhancement.Robert Sparrow - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):732-735.
    In this paper, I respond to recent criticisms, by Paula Casal, of my arguments about the implications of John Harris and Julian Savulescu's influential arguments for human enhancement for sex selection. I argue that, despite her protestations, her paper relies upon the idea that parents have a moral obligation to have children that will serve the interests of the nation. Casal’s use of dubious claims about inherent psychological differences between men and women to make her hypothetical case for moral enhancement (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Reform, not destroy: reply to McMahan, Sparrow and Temkin.Paula Casal - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (12):741-742.
    I'm very grateful to receive such long and thoughtful responses from some of the world's most creative and influential moral philosophers. Since I largely agree with Jeff McMahan and Larry Temkin, I will devote most of my scarce space to Rob Sparrow.Sparrow earlier claimed that since women gestate and live longer, enhancers are committed to parents conceiving only girls. To avoid this absurdity, we must reject enhancement and endorse what Sparrow calls “therapy”. I noted we first need to know what (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark