Germ-line enhancement of humans and nonhumans

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
: The current difference in attitude toward germ-line enhancement in humans and nonhumans is unjustified. Society should be more cautious in modifying the genes of nonhumans and more bold in thinking about modifying our own genome. I identify four classes of arguments pertaining to germ-line enhancement: safety arguments, justice arguments, trust arguments, and naturalness arguments. The first three types are compelling, but do not distinguish between human and nonhuman cases. The final class of argument would justify a distinction between human and nonhuman germ-line enhancement; however, this type of argument fails and, therefore, the discrepancy in attitude toward human and nonhuman germ-line enhancement is unjustified
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LOFGEO
Upload history
Archival date: 2012-10-19
View other versions
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
625 ( #9,580 of 64,254 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
13 ( #42,305 of 64,254 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.