Non‐Therapeutic Modification and Self‐Interest: Reply to Schramme

Bioethics 22 (8):455-456 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this article I reply to Thomas Schramme's argument that there are no good reasons for the prohibition of severe forms of voluntary non‐therapeutic body modification. I argue that on paternalistic assumptions there is, in fact, a perfectly good reason.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

Letter from the editor.Daniel Robinson - 2002 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 22 (1):ii-ii.
Reply to Letter to the Editor.[author unknown] - 2005 - American Journal of Bioethics 5 (3):14-15.
Letter to the Editor which raises questions for Catholic Priests.Subhasis Chattopadhyay - 2008 - Catholic Herald, Kolkata (Mouthpiece of the Archdiocese of Calcutta):n.p..
Disclosure: Is It Enough?L. Saunders - 2003 - Hastings Center Report 33 (3):4.
Letter to the Editor.[author unknown] - 1993 - Cogito 7 (1):81-81.
Letter to the Editor.[author unknown] - 1995 - Cogito 9 (3):279-279.
Letter to the Editor.[author unknown] - 1995 - Cogito 9 (2):192-192.
Letter to the Editor.[author unknown] - 1993 - Cogito 7 (2):164-164.
Letter from the Editor.Panayot Butchvarov - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:1-1.
J.G. Fichte and the Atheism Dispute, 1798-1800.Yolanda Estes - 2009 - Ashgate. Edited by Curtis Bowman.
Letter to the Editor.Ronald Pies - 2005 - Philosophical Practice 1 (2):75-76.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
77 (#211,518)

6 months
5 (#629,136)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Benjamin L. Curtis
Nottingham Trent University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references