Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Gene editing, identity and benefit.Thomas Douglas & Katrien Devolder - 2022 - Philosophical Quarterly 72 (2):305-325.
    Some suggest that gene editing human embryos to prevent genetic disorders will be in one respect morally preferable to using genetic selection for the same purpose: gene editing will benefit particular future persons, while genetic selection would merely replace them. We first construct the most plausible defence of this suggestion—the benefit argument—and defend it against a possible objection. We then advance another objection: the benefit argument succeeds only when restricted to cases in which the gene-edited child would have been brought (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • From Self‐Determination to Offspring‐Determination? Reproductive Autonomy, Procrustean Parenting, and Genetic Enhancement.Jon Rueda - 2021 - Theoria 88 (6):1086-1110.
    Emerging reprogenetic technologies may radically change how humans reproduce in the not-so-distant future. One foreseeable consequence of disruptive innovations in the procreative domain is an increase in the reproductive autonomy of intended parents. Regarding the prospective parental liberty of enhancing non-health–related traits of the offspring, one controversy has particularly dominated the literature. Does parents' choice of genetically enhancing the traits of their descendants compromise children's future personal autonomy? In this article, I will analyse the main arguments which posit that reprogenetic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Who are We, and Who (or What) Do We Want to Become? An Evolutionary Perspective on Biotransformative Technologies.James Lyons-Weiler - 2022 - Biological Theory 17 (2):138-152.
    Human evolution sits at several important thresholds. In organic evolution, interplay between exogenous environmental and genetic factors rendered new phenotypes at rates limited by genetic variation. The interplay took place on adaptive fitness landscapes determined by correspondence of genetic and environmental relationships. Human evolution involved important emergences that altered the adaptive landscape: language, writing, organized societies, science, and the internet. These endogenous factors ushered in transformative periods leading to more rapidly evolving emergences. I explore the impact of development of emerging (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Why human germline genome editing is incompatible with equality in an inclusive society.Calum MacKellar - 2021 - The New Bioethics 27 (1):19-29.
    Human germline genome editing is increasingly being seen as acceptable provided certain conditions are satisfied. Accordingly, genetic modifications would take place on eggs or sperm (or their prec...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • “Ethical Minefields” and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu.Julian Savulescu & Evangelos D. Protopapadakis - 2019 - Conatus 4 (1):125-133.
    Theoretical ethics includes both metaethics (the meaning of moral terms) and normative ethics (ethical theories and principles). Practical ethics involves making decisions about every day real ethical problems, like decisions about euthanasia, what we should eat, climate change, treatment of animals, and how we should live. It utilizes ethical theories, like utilitarianism and Kantianism, and principles, but more broadly a process of reflective equilibrium and consistency to decide how to act and be.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Is Human Enhancement in Space a Moral Duty? Missions to Mars, Advanced AI and Genome Editing in Space.Konrad Szocik - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (1):122-130.
    :Any space program involving long-term human missions will have to cope with serious risks to human health and life. Because currently available countermeasures are insufficient in the long term, there is a need for new, more radical solutions. One possibility is a program of human enhancement for future deep space mission astronauts. This paper discusses the challenges for long-term human missions of a space environment, opening the possibility of serious consideration of human enhancement and a fully automated space exploration, based (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Gene–environment interaction: why genetic enhancement might never be distributed fairly.Sinead Prince - 2024 - Journal of Medical Ethics 50 (4):272-277.
    Ethical debates around genetic enhancement tend to include an argument that the technology will eventually be fairly accessible once available. That we can fairly distribute genetic enhancement has become a moral defence of genetic enhancement. Two distribution solutions are argued for, the first being equal distribution. Equality of access is generally believed to be the fairest and most just method of distribution. Second, equitable distribution: providing genetic enhancements to reduce social inequalities. In this paper, I make two claims. I first (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Is Gene Editing Harmless? Two Arguments for Gene Editing.Julian Savulescu & Marcos Alonso - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 22 (9):23-28.
    … the decision to genome edit will almost certainly be identity affecting, as a couple (or individual) will usually make it before they have created any embryos and the process itself will, at the...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • ‘Eugenics is Back’? Historic References in Current Discussions of Germline Gene Editing.Robert Ranisch - 2019 - NanoEthics 13 (3):209-222.
    Comparisons between germline gene editing using CRISPR technology and a renewal of eugenics are evident in the current bioethical discussions. This article examines the different roles of such references to the past. In the first part, the alleged parallels between gene editing of the germline and eugenics are addressed from three perspectives: First, the historical adequacy of such comparisons is questioned. Second, it is asked whether the evils of the past can in fact be attributed to (future) practices of germline (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Why Human Enhancement is Necessary for Successful Human Deep-space Missions.Konrad Szocik & Martin Braddock - 2019 - The New Bioethics 25 (4):295-317.
    While humans have made enormous progress in the exploration and exploitation of Earth, exploration of outer space remains beyond current human capabilities. The principal challenges lie in current space technology and engineering which includes the protection of astronauts from the hazards of working and living in the space environment. These challenges may lead to a paradoxical situation where progress in space technology and the ability to ensure acceptable risk/benefit for human space exploration becomes dissociated and the rate of scientific discovery (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Initial heritable genome editing: mapping a responsible pathway from basic research to the clinic.Robert Ranisch, Katharina Trettenbach & Gardar Arnason - 2023 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 26 (1):21-35.
    Following the Second Summit on Human Gene Editing in Hong Kong in 2018, where the birth of two girls with germline genome editing was revealed, the need for a responsible pathway to the clinical application of human germline genome editing has been repeatedly emphasised. This paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion on research ethics issues in germline genome editing by exploring key issues related to the initial applications of CRISPR in reproductive medicine. Following an overview of the current (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • He Jiankui´s gene‐editing experiment and the non‐identity problem.Marcos Alonso & Julian Savulescu - 2021 - Bioethics 35 (6):563-573.
    Genetic engineering has been a topic of discussion for over 50 years, but it is only recently that gene editing has become a reality. CRISPR biotechnologies have made gene editing much safer, precise and feasible. We have witnessed the first cases of human germline genetic modification resulting in live births, conducted by He Jiankui. In this paper, we will analyse He Jiankui’s case in relation to one of the most difficult problems in procreative ethics (or the ethics of future generations): (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Moral and Fictional Discourses on Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Current Responses, Future Scenarios.Maurizio Balistreri & Solveig Lena Hansen - 2019 - NanoEthics 13 (3):199-207.
    This paper gives an introduction to the interdisciplinary special section. Against the historical and ethical background of reproductive technologies, it explores future scenarios of human reproduction and analyzes ways of mutual engagement between fictional and academic endeavors. The underlying idea is that we can make use of human reproduction scenarios in at least two ways: we can use them to critique technologies by imagining terrible consequences for humanity but also to defend positions that favor scientific and technological development.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Genome Editing and Relational Autonomy.Aline Kalbian - 2022 - Journal of Religious Ethics 50 (3):412-432.
    Developed in the past two decades, the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats‐associated protein 9 (CRISPR‐Cas9) technique offers greater accessibility and efficiency in editing genes. Its immediate success has transformed medical research and treatment in productive ways, but has also left questions about ethical consequences in its wake. These are questions familiar to bioethical inquiry. How do we balance short‐term and long‐term benefits and risks? How do we promote just and equitable access to new medical interventions? How do we protect (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark