Human Nature Technologically Revisited

Social Philosophy and Policy 8 (1):180 (1990)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay is meant as a form of philosophical exorcism. The goal is to dispel the view that there are general secular grounds for holding human germline genetic engineering to be intrinsically wrong, a malum in se, or a morally culpable violation of human nature. The essay endorses the view that major obligations of prudence and care attend the development of this technology. However, these justifiable moral concerns can be seen more clearly when one has dispelled what must, from a secular perspective, be regarded as pseudo-issues

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,774

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

Germline Modifications as a Severe Intervention into Human Nature.Nadia Primc - 2018 - In Matthias Braun, Hannah Schickl & Peter Dabrock (eds.), Between Moral Hazard and Legal Uncertainty: Ethical, Legal and Societal Challenges of Human Genome Editing. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. pp. 99-110.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-31

Downloads
50 (#102,555)

6 months
12 (#1,086,452)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

A Treatise of Human Nature.David Hume & A. D. Lindsay - 1958 - Philosophical Quarterly 8 (33):379-380.
Functions.Larry Wright - 1973 - Philosophical Review 82 (2):139-168.
On the distinction between disease and illness.Christopher Boorse - 1975 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 5 (1):49-68.
Wright on functions.Christopher Boorse - 1976 - Philosophical Review 85 (1):70-86.

View all 11 references / Add more references