Philosophy 90 (4):623-651 (2015)

Authors
Micah Lott
Boston College
Daniel Groll
Carleton College
Abstract
In discussions about the ethics of enhancement, it is often claimed that the concept of ‘human nature’ has no helpful role to play. There are two ideas behind this thought. The first is that nature, human nature included, is a mixed bag. Some parts of our nature are good for us and some are bad for us. The ‘mixed bag’ idea leads naturally to the second idea, namely that the fact that something is part of our nature is, by itself, normatively inert. The Inert View claims that nothing normative follows from the mere fact that some trait is a part of our nature. If the Inert View is correct, then appeals to the value or importance of human nature in debates about enhancement are indeed misplaced. We argue that the Inert View is wrong, and that a certain concept of human nature – which we refer to as human form – does have an important role to play in debates about enhancement.
Keywords Enhancement  Human Nature  Neo-Aristotelianism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0031819115000376
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

Human Nature: The Very Idea.Tim Lewens - 2012 - Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):459-474.
Enhancements Are A Moral Obligation.John Harris - 2010 - In Julian Savulescu & Nick Bostrom (eds.), Human Enhancement. Oxford University Press.
Human Engineering and Climate Change.S. Matthew Liao, Anders Sandberg & Rebecca Roache - 2012 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 15 (2):206 - 221.
What Is And Is Not Wrong With Enhancement?Frances Kamm - 2010 - In Julian Savulescu & Nick Bostrom (eds.), Human Enhancement. Oxford University Press.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Aristotelian Naturalism Vs. Mutants, Aliens and the Great Red Dragon.Scott Woodcock - 2018 - American Philosophical Quarterly 55 (4):313-328.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Human Nature and Enhancement.Allen Buchanan - 2009 - Bioethics 23 (3):141-150.
Genetic Enhancement, Human Nature, and Rights.T. Mcconnell - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (4):415-428.
A Thomistic Appraisal of Human Enhancement Technologies.Jason T. Eberl - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (4):289-310.
Enhancement Technologies and the Person: Christian Perspectives.Andrew Lustig - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (1):41-50.
The Ethics of Human Enhancement.Alberto Giubilini & Sagar Sanyal - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (4):233-243.
Human Nature: An Oxymoron?David Heyd - 2003 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (2):151 – 169.
Human Nature: The Very Idea.Tim Lewens - 2012 - Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):459-474.
Enhancement and Human Nature: The Case of Sandel.T. Lewens - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (6):354-356.
The Wisdom of Nature: An Evolutionary Heuristic for Human Enhancement.Nick Bostrom & Anders Sandberg - 2009 - In Julian Savulescu & Nick Bostrom (eds.), Human Enhancement. Oxford University Press. pp. 375--416.
Integration of Cognitive and Moral Enhancement.Vojin Rakic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):91-103.
Understanding Human Being. Constructivism Versus Naturalism.Boris G. Yudin - 2008 - Dialogue and Universalism 18 (11-12):101-113.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-06-13

Total views
755 ( #9,453 of 2,498,240 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
39 ( #22,088 of 2,498,240 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes