Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Humanity’s End: Why We Should Reject Radical Enhancement.Nicholas Agar - 2010 - Bradford.
    Proposals to make us smarter than the greatest geniuses or to add thousands of years to our life spans seem fit only for the spam folder or trash can. And yet this is what contemporary advocates of radical enhancement offer in all seriousness. They present a variety of technologies and therapies that will expand our capacities far beyond what is currently possible for human beings. In _Humanity's End,_ Nicholas Agar argues against radical enhancement, describing its destructive consequences. Agar examines the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   62 citations  
  • Could it be permissible to prevent the existence of morally enhanced people?Ingmar Persson - 2012 - Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (11):692-693.
    This paper discusses Nicholas Agar's argument in Humanity's End, that it can be morally permissible for human beings to prevent the coming into existence of morally enhanced people because this can harm the interests of the unenhanced humans. It contends that Agar's argument fails because it overlooks the distinction between morally permissible and morally impermissible harm. It is only if the harm to them would be of the morally impermissible kind that humans are provided with a reason to prevent the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations