Bioethics 29 (3):142-152 (2015)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Jurgen Habermas has argued that carrying out pre-natal germline enhancements would be inimical to the future child's autonomy. In this article, I suggest that many of the objections that have been made against Habermas' arguments by liberals in the enhancement debate misconstrue his claims. To explain why, I begin by explaining how Habermas' view of personal autonomy confers particular importance to the agent's embodiment and social environment. In view of this, I explain that it is possible to draw two arguments against germline enhancements from Habermas' thought. I call these arguments ‘the argument from negative freedom’ and ‘the argument from natality’. Although I argue that many of the common liberal objections to Habermas are not applicable when his arguments are properly understood, I go on to suggest ways in which supporters of enhancement might appropriately respond to Habermas' arguments.
|
Keywords | Autonomy Genetic Modification |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1111/bioe.12082 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
From Self-Determination to Offspring-Determination? Reproductive Autonomy, Procrustean Parenting, and Genetic Enhancement.Jon Rueda - forthcoming - Theoria.
CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing – New and Old Ethical Issues Arising From a Revolutionary Technology.Martina Baumann - 2016 - NanoEthics 10 (2):139-159.
Similar books and articles
The Silencing of Kierkegaard in Habermas' Critique of Genetic Enhancement.Karin Christiansen - 2009 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 12 (2):147-156.
Autonomy and Enhancement.G. Owen Schaefer, Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (2):123-136.
Genetic Enhancement as Care or as Domination? The Ethics of Asymmetrical Relationships in the Upbringing of Children.Maureen Junker-Kenny - 2005 - Journal of Philosophy of Education 39 (1):1–17.
Autonomy, Pluralism, and the Future of the Species: Agar and Habermas on Liberal Eugenics.Wade Roberts - 2006 - Social Philosophy Today 22:153-167.
Justification and Application: The Revival of the Rawls–Habermas Debate.Jørgen Pedersen - 2012 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 42 (3):399-432.
Negative Autonomy and the Intuitions of Democracy.Bryce Weber - 2006 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 32 (3):325-346.
The Bounds of Reason: Habermas, Lyotard and Melanie Klein on Rationality.Emilia Steuerman - 1999 - Routledge.
The Bounds of Reason: Habermas, Lyotard and Melanie Klein on Rationality.Emilia Steuerman - 1999 - Routledge.
Habermas on Human Cloning: The Debate on the Future of the Species.Eduardo Mendieta - 2004 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (5-6):721-743.
Enhancement and the Ethics of Development.Allen Buchanan - 2008 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 18 (1):pp. 1-34.
From Species Ethics to Social Concerns: Habermas’s Critique of “Liberal Eugenics” Evaluated.Vilhjálmur Árnason - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (5):353-367.
„Enhancement“ zwischen Selbstbetrug und Selbstverwirklichung.Pd Dr Bernward Gesang - 2006 - Ethik in der Medizin 18 (1):10-26.
Foucault Contra Habermas: Recasting the Dialogue Between Genealogy and Critical Theory.Samantha Ashenden & David Owen (eds.) - 1999 - Sage Publications.
Analysing Our Qualms About “Designing” Future Persons: Autonomy, Freedom of Choice, and Interfering with Nature. [REVIEW]Erik Malmqvist - 2007 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 10 (4):407-416.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2014-02-20
Total views
147 ( #79,545 of 2,506,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #68,211 of 2,506,078 )
2014-02-20
Total views
147 ( #79,545 of 2,506,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #68,211 of 2,506,078 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads