Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Disposable Bodies, Disabled Minds, and Christian Hope: Resurrection in Light of Transhumanism and Intellectual Disability.Andrew Sloane - 2023 - Zygon 58 (2):340-357.
    This piece brings into critical conversation Christian resurrection hope, virtual versions of transhumanism, and intellectual disability and demonstrates that Christian resurrection provides a more cogent hope for people with severe intellectual disabilities than transhumanism. I argue that transhumanist virtual futures are theologically problematic, as bodily resurrection is neither required nor desirable. It is particularly problematic for people with severe intellectual disabilities given the way they would be excluded from these futures. Disability theology also raises issues with the traditional notions of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Defining Disability: Creating a Monster?Marissa D. Espinoza & Addison S. Tenorio - 2022 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 47 (5):573-582.
    Disability is often defined as deviation from putative norms of physical, cognitive, or affective function. This definition is normatively laden, causing people with disabilities to be thought of as “different” and treated with pity. We address the predominant theme of this issue on “Disability Identity”: defining and imposing the category of “disability” and attempting to overcome it through medical intervention. The issue culminates in a call for courageous humility as the proper response to encounters with disability, providing medical professionals with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Disability, Enhancement, and Flourishing.Jason T. Eberl - 2022 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 47 (5):597-611.
    Recent debate among bioethicists concerns the potential to enhance human beings’ physical or cognitive capacities by means of genetic, pharmacological, cybernetic, or surgical interventions. Between “transhumanists,” who argue for unreserved enhancement of human capabilities, and “bioconservatives,” who warn against any non-therapeutic manipulation of humanity’s natural condition, lie those who support limited forms of enhancement for the sake of individual and collective human flourishing. Many scholars representing these views also share a concern over the status and interests of human beings with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations