Enhancement

Germ-line enhancements and rough equality

by Michele Loi

ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES 19, no. 1(2012): 55-82.

Enhancements of the human germ-line introduce further inequalities in the competition for scarce goods, such as income... more Enhancements of the human germ-line introduce further inequalities in the competition for scarce goods, such as income and desirable social positions. Social inequalities, in turn, amplify the range of genetic inequalities that access to germ-line enhancements may produce. From an egalitarian point of view, inequalities can be arranged to the benefit of the worst-off group (for instance, through general taxation), but the possibility of an indefinite growth of social and genetic inequality raises legitimate concerns. It is argued that inequalities produced by markets of germ-line enhancements are just if it they are embedded in a framework of social institutions that satisfies two conditions: (i) Rawls’ Difference Principle, which states that inequalities of income and wealth should benefit the worst-off group; (ii) the lexically prior 'principle of rough equality', which states that citizens’ initial life-chances should be similar enough, so that extreme inequalities in income, wealth and power are not produced or accumulated through institutions justified by the Difference Principle. The principle of rough equality replaces the Rawlsian principles of the Fair Value of the Political Liberties and Fair Equality of Opportunity in a post-genomic society and expresses a concern with background political equality, which is argued to be a condition of the freedom and equality of citizens that should not be traded off with material benefits. Extreme inequalities are defined in terms of political equality.

download article

Moral enhancement: what is it and do we want it?

by Anna Pacholczyk

published in Law, Innovation and Technology.

Enhancements, easy short cuts, and the richness of human activities

by Maartje Schermer

published in Bioethics, 2008

One argument that is frequently invoked against the technological enhancement of human functioning is that it is... more One argument that is frequently invoked against the technological enhancement of human functioning is that it is morally suspect, or even wrong, to take an easy shortcut. Some things that usually take effort, endurance or struggle can come easily with the use of an enhancer. This paper analyses the various arguments that circle round the idea that enhancement of human functioning is problematic because of the easy shortcut that it offers. It discusses the concern that quick fixes lead to corrosion of character and the idea that suffering, pain, hard work and effort are essential for real and worthy achievements, and argues that these views are largely mistaken. Next, the paper argues that the core worry about taking an easy shortcut is that it makes us lose sight of the complexities of our means and ends; in other words, the argument warns against reducing the richness of human activities. A vocabulary of practices, internal goods and focal engagement will be used to articulate this argument further. The conclusion is that the easy shortcut argument has no general validity as an argument against enhancement as such. The paper urges us, however, to evaluate enhancement technologies not only in terms of their efficiency in reaching certain goals but also in terms of their contribution to intrinsically worthwhile human activities. It can point out some of the caveats, as well as the opportunities, of the use of enhancement technologies.

The sociology of cognitive enhancement: Medicalisation and beyond

by Catherine Coveney

Published in Health Sociology Review (2011) 20(4): 378-390. Co-authored with Simon Williams and Jonathan Gabe

To date, sociology of health and medicine has engaged in only a limited way in debates about cognitive enhancement... more To date, sociology of health and medicine has engaged in only a limited way in debates about cognitive enhancement drugs and how they might affect or change the way we live our lives. In this review we explore the implications of the development of such drugs, both now and in the future, with particular reference to the changing drivers and dynamics of medicalisation or biomedicalisation over time. Whilst both concepts shed important light on these developments, pharmaceuticalisation provides a more precise sociological term of reference we suggest for tracing and tracking these trends in cognitive enhancing drugs over time. The paper ends with some further suggestions for a research agenda in this domain, drawing on concepts located at the nexus between Science and Technology Studies (STS) and the sociology of health and biomedicine.

Free using of the own body

by Tamás Mezei

Presented on ENRI Conference in Oradea

more https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxlbnJpY29uZmVyZW5jZXxneDo1YjRkNWY0MGY0ZTIzZWI1&pli=1

De maakbare mens: utopie, dystopie of realiteit?

by Maartje Schermer

Does Memory Modification Threaten Our Authenticity?

by Alexandre Erler

Neuroethics 4:3 (2011), 235-249, DOI 10.1007/s12152-010-9090-4

A discussion of the question whether memory modification technologies threaten the authenticity of our lives. My... more A discussion of the question whether memory modification technologies threaten the authenticity of our lives. My central claim is that one particular form of memory modification, memory editing, can lead us to lead an inauthentic life, in two main ways: first, by threatening its truthfulness, and secondly, by interfering with our disposition to respond in certain ways to some past events, when we have reasons to respond in such ways. This gives us a significant moral reason not to manipulate our memory in ways that would lead to such an outcome.

Nanotechnology: Considering the Complex Ethical, Legal, and Societal Issues with the Parameters of Human Performance

by Linda MacDonald Glenn

Nanotechnology: Considering the Complex Ethical, Legal, and Societal Issues with the Parameters of Human Performance

by Linda MacDonald Glenn

At the Nexus: Augmented Cogntion, Health Care and the Law

by Linda MacDonald Glenn

Co-authored with Dr. Jeanann S. Boyce

Augmented cognition, like so many new technologies, has its promises and its perils. Whereas recent literature in... more Augmented cognition, like so many new technologies, has its promises and its perils. Whereas recent literature in ethics focuses on the military origins and applications of augmented cognition and harnessing the power of a symbiotic brain-nervous system-computer system for warfare, this article analyzes this technology for applications in health care settings and research. Additionally, a delineation of how law and policy makers might respond to issues in shared culpability and responsibility is proposed.

Human Enhancement, Prosthesis and Transhumanism

by Byron Kaldis

ABC-CLIO World Historical Encyclopedia

The Fantastic Body. On Man Making His Own Body - His Dignity, His Insanity

by Pieter Bonte

Why Should I Be Natural? A fivefold challenge to the supposed duty to 'be natural' as grounds for outlawing human enhancement

by Pieter Bonte

Published as Chapter 10 in Technologies on the Stand: Legal and Ethical Questions in Neuroscience and Robotics, eds. van den Berg, B. & Klaming, L. 2011. Wolf Legal Publishers. Pp. 215-248.

Human enhancement technologies put us at liberty to materially remake ourselves from our appearance over our physical... more Human enhancement technologies put us at liberty to materially remake ourselves from our appearance over our physical capacities right down to our own mental activity: we are becoming ʻself-shaping animalsʼ through and through. Proclaiming a moral duty not to transform our human nature – a duty to be and remain an unmodified homo sapiens – ʻbioconservativesʼ consider the enhancement enterprise unnatural and dehumanizing, to be condemned and according to some even outlawed. This paper denies that such a duty exists by adding the following arguments to the often heard naturalistic fallacy objection: (1) human nature may come to hinder our pursuit of worthy goals, (2) evolution made us ʻcrooked timber, out of which no straight thing can be madeʼ, if not for the help of enhancement technologies, (3) even if we could consider ourselves ʻwell-created beingsʼ, nothing should hold us back to ennoble ourselves even further, (4) our default biological determinations are in principle even more estranging to us than the insertion of artifacts in ourselves, and finally (5) in principle, there is greater unfairness in the ʻnatural lotteryʼ than in a well-guided policy of ʻenhanced equalityʼ. This battery of arguments deeply undermines the belief that there is a ʻduty to be naturalʼ. However, this does not imply that human enhancement ipso facto becomes a laudable undertaking, nor that human nature should be ignored altogether when deciding how to improve our lot. It does, however, discredit the notion that there are ethical reasons to categorically conserve our homo sapiens nature, come what may.

Hearing Beyond the Normal Enabled by Therapeutic Devices: The Role of the Recipient and the Hearing Profession

by Gregor Wolbring

open access

The time is near where ‘therapeutic’ bodily assistive devices, developed to mimic species-typical body structures in... more The time is near where ‘therapeutic’ bodily assistive devices, developed to mimic species-typical body structures in order to enable normative body functioning, will allow the wearer to outperform the species-typical body in various functions. Although such devices are developed for people that are seen to exhibit sub species-typical abilities, many ‘therapeutic enhancements’ might also be desired and used by people that exhibit species-typical body abilities. This paper presents the views of members of the World Federation of the Deaf on potential beyond species-typical abilities enabling therapeutic assistive devices (i.e. related to hearing). Survey respondents showed support for the development and uptake of beyond normal hearing enabling devices. The views of survey respondents as clients affect hearing-enabling professions (such as audiologist and speech pathologists). The paper analyzes what guidance code of ethics of hearing enabling professions give in regards to beyond normal hearing enabling devices. This paper suggests that people labeled impaired and the professions that serve them should more involved in the enhancement discourse.

Genetic Enhancement in Sports: The Role of Reason and Private Rationalities in the Public Arena

by Dr Silvia Camporesi

co-authored with Paolo Maugeri, at European School of Molecular Medicine & University of Milano.
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare EthicsCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics (2011), 20: 248-257

Reviews of philosophical books run the risk of being either excessively and unconstructively critical or superficially... more Reviews of philosophical books run the risk of being either excessively and unconstructively critical or superficially praiseworthy. To avoid both these risks, we test the approach outlined by Häyry in his book Rationality and the Genetic Challenge: Making People Better? by applying it to an eighth genetic challenge, namely, a variation of the genetic enhancement challenge discussed by Häyry as it applies to sports. We assess whether genetic enhancement in sports should be conceived as an eighth wonder or an eighth cardinal sin that stems from the interaction between genetics and society, question whether Häyry’s nonconfrontational approach is really useful for dealing with these issues, and discuss how his method can be improved.

Oscar Pistorius, Enhancement and Post-Humans

by Dr Silvia Camporesi

On 26 May 2008, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne reversed the IAAF decision and ruled that Oscar... more On 26 May 2008, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne reversed the IAAF decision and ruled that Oscar should be able to compete against Olympic athletes, on the basis that the IAAF "did not prove that claim [of unfair advantage] to a sufficient extent". [...]
His case is a snap-shot into the future of sport. It is plausible to think that in
50 years, or maybe less, the ‘‘natural’’, able-bodied athletes will just appear anachronistic.As our concept of what is ‘‘natural’’ depends on what we are used to, and evolves with our society and culture,12 so does our concept of ‘‘purity’’ of sport, and our concept of how an Olympics athlete should look.

Obsolescence and body technologies Obsolescencia y tecnologías del cuerpo

by Gregor Wolbring

Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics Vol 2 No 4

ABSTRACT: One of the most consequential advances
in sciences and technology is the increasing
generation of... more ABSTRACT: One of the most consequential advances
in sciences and technology is the increasing
generation of bodily enhancement
products that enable a culture of, demand for,
and acceptance of improving and modifying
the human body (structure, function, abilities)
beyond its species-typical boundaries. A lively
discourse exists around the rights and wrongs
of human genetic and other forms of
enhancement. Many treat the species-typical
human body as an obsolescent technology in
need of serious improvements. This raises
various questions. This paper addresses the
following questions: a) can one refuse the
upgrade, b) who has access to the upgrade, c)
is there a way to revert to the obsolescent
state after the upgrade, and d) what is the
impact of perceiving oneself as obsolescent.

Do we have an obligation to make smarter babies?

by Lisa Bortolotti

In Takala et al. (eds.) Cutting Through the Surface: Philosophical Approaches to Bioethics, Rodopi 2009

In this paper I consider some issues concerning cognitive enhancements and the ethics of enhancing in reproduction and... more In this paper I consider some issues concerning cognitive enhancements and the ethics of enhancing in reproduction and parenting. I argue that there are moral reasons to enhance the cognitive capacities of the children one has, or of the children one is going to have, and that these enhancements should not be seen as an alternative to pursuing important changes in society that might also improve one’s own and one’s children’s life. It has been argued that an emphasis on enhancing cognitive capacities might encourage the commodification of children. But this objection seems misplaced. The reasons why one decides to reproduce can be subject to moral approbation or condemnation, as such rea-sons might be indicators of the quality of one’s parenting and the happiness of the future persons one is committed to bringing to life. However, once the decision to reproduce is made, no further harm comes from taking as few risks as possible on behalf of the persons to whom one is giving life with their health, character and cognitive capacities.

Disability, Enhancement and the Harm -Benefit Continuum

by Lisa Bortolotti

Co-authored with John Harris and appeared in John R. Spencer & Antje Du Bois-Pedain (eds.), Freedom and Responsibility in Reproductive Choice. Hart Publishers 2006.

Suppose that you are soon to be a parent and you learn that there are some simple measures that you can take to make... more Suppose that you are soon to be a parent and you learn that there are some simple measures that you can take to make sure that your child will be healthy. In particular, suppose that by following the doctor’s advice, you can prevent your child from having a disability, you can make your child immune from a number of dangerous diseases and you can even enhance its future intelligence. All that is required for this to happen is that you (or your partner) comply with lifestyle and dietary requirements. Do you and your partner have any moral reasons (or moral obligations) to follow the doctor’s advice? Would it make a difference if, instead of following some simple dietary requirements, you consented to genetic engineering to make sure that your child was free from disabilities, healthy and with above average intelligence? In this paper we develop a framework for dealing with these questions and we suggest some directions the answers might take.