Bioethics 30 (7):500-510 (2016)

Authors
Alfred Archer
Tilburg University
Abstract
Opponents to genetic or biomedical human enhancement often claim that the availability of these technologies would have negative consequences for those who either choose not to utilize these resources or lack access to them. However, Thomas Douglas has argued that this objection has no force against the use of technologies that aim to bring about morally desirable character traits, as the unenhanced would benefit from being surrounded by such people. I will argue that things are not as straightforward as Douglas makes out. The widespread use of moral enhancement would raise the standards for praise and blame worthiness, making it much harder for the unenhanced to perform praiseworthy actions or avoid performing blameworthy actions. This shows that supporters of moral enhancement cannot avoid this challenge in the way that Douglas suggests
Keywords moral obligation  enhancement  moral enhancement
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/bioe.12251
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

A Theory of the Good and the Right.Richard B. Brandt - 1979 - Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 35 (2):307-310.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Moral Neuroenhancement.Brian D. Earp, Thomas Douglas & Julian Savulescu - 2017 - In L. Syd M. Johnson & Karen S. Rommelfanger (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Neuroethics. Routledge.
How Would We Know If Moral Enhancement Had Occurred?Garry Young - 2018 - Journal of Speculative Philosophy 32 (4):587-606.
Reading Literary Fiction as Moral Enhancement.Katharina Fürholzer & Sabine Salloch - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 7 (2):104-106.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Moral Enhancement.Thomas Douglas - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.
The Perils of Moral Enhancement.Aleksandar Dobrijevic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):104-110.
Integration of Cognitive and Moral Enhancement.Vojin Rakic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):91-103.
Should We Enhance Animals?S. Chan - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (11):678-683.
Moral Perfection and the Demand for Human Enhancement.Adriana Warmbier - forthcoming - Ethics in Progress 2015 (No.1).
The Myth of the Moral Enhancement: Back to the Future?Veselin Mitrovic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):111-123.
Human Enhancement and Supra-Personal Moral Status.Thomas Douglas - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 162 (3):473-497.
Moral Enhancement and Freedom.John Harris - 2011 - Bioethics 25 (2):102-111.
Voluntary Moral Enhancement and the Survival-at-Any-Cost Bias.Vojin Rakić - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (4):246-250.
Besser ist besser? Enhancement der Moral aus einer handlungstheoretischen Perspektive.Ezio Di Nucci - forthcoming - In Raphael van Riel, Ezio Di Nucci & Jan Schildmann (eds.), Enhancement der Moral. Mentis. pp. Kapitel 4.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-11-18

Total views
714 ( #10,352 of 2,499,703 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
56 ( #14,576 of 2,499,703 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes