Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Evolution of Human Birth and Transhumanist Proposals of Enhancement.Eduardo R. Cruz - 2015 - Zygon 50 (4):830-853.
    Some transhumanists argue that we must engage with theories and facts about our evolutionary past in order to promote future enhancements of the human body. At the same time, they call our attention to the flawed character of evolution and argue that there is a mismatch between adaptation to ancestral environments and contemporary life. One important trait of our evolutionary past which should not be ignored, and yet may hinder the continued perfection of humankind, is the peculiarly human way of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Medicalization and Overdiagnosis: Different but Alike.Bjørn Hofmann - 2016 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 19 (2):253-264.
    Medicalization is frequently defined as a process by which some non-medical aspects of human life become to be considered as medical problems. Overdiagnosis, on the other hand, is most often defined as diagnosing a biomedical condition that in the absence of testing would not cause symptoms or death in the person’s lifetime. Medicalization and overdiagnosis are related concepts as both expand the extension of the concept of disease. They are both often used normatively to critique unwarranted or contested expansion of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Medicalization and Epistemic Injustice.Alistair Wardrope - 2015 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 18 (3):341-352.
    Many critics of medicalization express concern that the process privileges individualised, biologically grounded interpretations of medicalized phenomena, inhibiting understanding and communication of aspects of those phenomena that are less relevant to their biomedical modelling. I suggest that this line of critique views medicalization as a hermeneutical injustice—a form of epistemic injustice that prevents people having the hermeneutical resources available to interpret and communicate significant areas of their experience. Interpreting the critiques in this fashion shows they frequently fail because they: neglect (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Enhancements 2.0: Self-Creation Might Not Be as Lovely as Some Think.Mirko Garasic - 2019 - Topoi 38 (1):135-140.
    Recent developments in the study of our brain and neurochemical maps have sparked much enthusiasm in some scholars, making room for speculations over the possibility to shape our morality from within ourselves rather than through [failed] socio-political projects. This paper aims at criticising the prospected scenario put forward by some scholars supporting a specific version of Moral Enhancement as an overly optimistically described manipulative tools. To do so, I will focus on a specific version of Moral Enhancers, namely Emotional Enhancers. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Are There Morally Relevant Differences Between Hymen Restoration and Bloodless Treatment for Jehovah’s Witnesses?Niklas Juth & Niels Lynøe - 2014 - BMC Medical Ethics 15 (1):89.
    Hymen reconstruction is a controversial measure performed to help young females under threat of honour-related violence. Official guidelines often reject offering hymen reconstructions. On the other hand, extraordinary measures in order to enable operations of Jehovah’s Witnesses who want a bloodless operation in order to avoid religiously related sanctions are often considered praiseworthy. The aim is thus to examine whether or not there are relevant differences between these two measures.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Binocularity in Bioethics—and Beyond: A Review of Erik Parens, Shaping Our Selves: On Technology, Flourishing, and a Habit of Thinking. [REVIEW]Brian D. Earp & Michael Hauskeller - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (2):3-6.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Benefits and Risks of Quantified Relationship Technologies: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Quantified Relationship”.John Danaher, Sven Nyholm & Brian D. Earp - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (2):3-6.
    The growth of self-tracking and personal surveillance has given rise to the Quantified Self movement. Members of this movement seek to enhance their personal well-being, productivity, and self-actualization through the tracking and gamification of personal data. The technologies that make this possible can also track and gamify aspects of our interpersonal, romantic relationships. Several authors have begun to challenge the ethical and normative implications of this development. In this article, we build upon this work to provide a detailed ethical analysis (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • The Quantified Relationship.John Danaher, Sven Nyholm & Brian D. Earp - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (2):3-19.
    The growth of self-tracking and personal surveillance has given rise to the Quantified Self movement. Members of this movement seek to enhance their personal well-being, productivity, and self-actualization through the tracking and gamification of personal data. The technologies that make this possible can also track and gamify aspects of our interpersonal, romantic relationships. Several authors have begun to challenge the ethical and normative implications of this development. In this article, we build upon this work to provide a detailed ethical analysis (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Direct-to-Consumer Neurotechnologies and Quantified Relationship Technologies: Overlapping Ethical Concerns.Sven Nyholm, Brian D. Earp & John Danaher - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 10 (4):167-170.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Whereto Speculative Bioethics? Technological Visions and Future Simulations in a Science Fictional Culture.Ari Schick - 2016 - Medical Humanities 42 (4):225-231.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Psychedelic Moral Enhancement.Brian D. Earp - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:415-439.
    The moral enhancement debate seems stuck in a dilemma. On the one hand, the more radical proposals, while certainly novel and interesting, seem unlikely to be feasible in practice, or if technically feasible then most likely imprudent. But on the other hand, the more sensible proposals – sensible in the sense of being both practically achievable and more plausibly ethically justifiable – can be rather hard to distinguish from both traditional forms of moral enhancement, such as non-drug-mediated social or moral (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Medicalization of Love.Brian D. Earp, Anders Sandberg & Julian Savulescu - 2016 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 25 (4):759-771.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • A Responsibility to Chemically Help Patients with Relationships and Love?Gavin G. Enck & Jeanna Ford - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):493-496.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • On Love, Ethics, Technology, and Neuroenhancement.David Ferraro - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):486-489.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Trivial Love.Oskar Macgregor - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):497-500.
    In their recent contribution to this journal, Brian D. Earp, Anders Sandberg, and Julian Savulescu argue that "the 'medicalization of love' need not necessarily be problematic, on balance, but could plausibly be expected to have either good or bad consequences depending upon how it unfolds." Although I find myself in agreement with the majority of the points the authors make to this end, as well as with the general thrust of their position, I am nevertheless left feeling rather unsatisfied by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Unrequited Love Hurts.Francesca Minerva - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):479-485.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Two Concerns About the Medicalization of Love.Martin O’Reilly - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (4):490-492.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Clipping the Angel’s Wings.Michael Hauskeller - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (3):361-365.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Unrequited.Rebecca Bamford - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (3):355-360.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Normality, Therapy, and Enhancement.Alberto Giubilini - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (3):347-354.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Medicalization of Love and Narrow and Broad Conceptions of Human Well-Being.Sven Nyholm - 2015 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 24 (3):337-346.
    Would a “medicalization” of love be a “good” or “bad” form of medicalization? In discussing this question, Earp, Sandberg, and Savulescu primarily focus on the potential positive and negative consequences of turning love into a medical issue. But it can also be asked whether there is something intrinsically regrettable about medicalizing love. It is argued here that the medicalization of love can be seen as an “evaluative category mistake”: it treats a core human value as if it were mainly a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Ethics of Human Enhancement.Alberto Giubilini & Sagar Sanyal - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (4):233-243.
    Ethical debate surrounding human enhancement, especially by biotechnological means, has burgeoned since the turn of the century. Issues discussed include whether specific types of enhancement are permissible or even obligatory, whether they are likely to produce a net good for individuals and for society, and whether there is something intrinsically wrong in playing God with human nature. We characterize the main camps on the issue, identifying three main positions: permissive, restrictive and conservative positions. We present the major sub-debates and lines (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Moving Beyond Concerns of Autonomy.Gavin G. Enck - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 6 (4):26-28.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation