The illiberality of perfectionist enhancement

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 12 (1):91-98 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

With the rapid advance of bio-genetic technology, it will soon be possible for parents to design children who are born with certain genetic traits. This raises the question whether parents should be allowed to use this technology to engineer their children as they please. In this context it is often thought and argued that liberalism, which has a reputation for being permissive of all kinds of practices, grants parents the right to do so. However, I will argue that, on an understanding of liberalism that is identical to the one used by the defenders of genetic design, liberals should wary of such practices. Liberalism, in its most general form, requires that any time individuals exercise power over others they justify it without relying on any particular conception of what a good life is. When we design children to have certain traits that are only useful for realising some conceptions of the good life, we are implicitly endorsing those conceptions. Hence this practice cannot be justified in neutral terms, and liberals should be sceptical of it. Only when we engineer our children to have traits that are useful for all conceptions of the good life can liberals allow the use of this new technology. Indeed, liberalism holds that this is morally required

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,709

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The wisdom of caution: Genetic enhancement and future children.Jason Borenstein - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (4):517-530.
Can human genetic enhancement be prohibited?William Gardner - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (1):65-84.
Moderate eugenics and human enhancement.Michael J. Selgelid - 2014 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 17 (1):3-12.
Egalitarianism and Responsibility in the Genetic Future.Linda Barclay - 2009 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (2):119-134.
Liberalism and eugenics.Robert Sparrow - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):499 - 517.
Genetic Enhancement and Parental Obligation.Larry A. Herzberg - 2007 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (2):98-111.
The Moral Significance of the Therapy-Enhancement Distinction in Human Genetics.David B. Resnik - 2000 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9 (3):365-377.
Genetic enhancement: Plan now to act later.Maxwell J. Mehlman - 2005 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (1):77-82.
Human enhancement and sexual dimorphism.Rob Sparrow - 2011 - Bioethics 26 (9):464-475.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-01

Downloads
26 (#608,273)

6 months
4 (#778,909)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Liberalism and eugenics.Robert Sparrow - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):499 - 517.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Philosophy and the human sciences.Charles Taylor - 1985 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
The Future of Human Nature.Jürgen Habermas - 2003 - Cambridge, UK: Polity. Edited by Jürgen Habermas.
The morality of freedom.J. Raz - 1988 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (1):108-109.
The Future of Human Nature.Jürgen Habermas - 2003 - Cambridge, UK: Polity. Edited by Jürgen Habermas.

View all 23 references / Add more references