Philosophy and Technology 30 (4):427-441 (2017)
AbstractIn this paper, we discuss the following four alternative ways of understanding the outcomes of resurrection biology. Implications of each of the ways are discussed with respect to concepts of species and extinction. Replication: animals created by resurrection biology do not belong to the original species but are copies of it. The view is compatible with finality of extinction as well as with certain biological and ecological species concepts. Re-creation: animals created are members of the original species but, despite their existence, the species remains extinct. The view is incompatible with all species concepts presented. Non-extinction: animals produced belong to the original species which actually never went extinct. The view may be consistent with phenetic and phylogenetic species concepts as well as with finality of extinction. According to literal resurrection, resurrection biology is successful in reversing extinction through the creation of new members of species that once went extinct. This view presupposes non-finality of extinction and it is compatible with phenetic species concepts. It is notable that no species or extinction concept is consistent with all possible views of resurrection biology nor is any view of resurrection biology consistent with all species or extinction concepts. Thus, one’s views regarding species and extinction determine which views one can adopt regarding resurrection biology and vice versa.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Darwinian Metaphysics: Species and the Question of Essentialism.Samir Okasha - 2002 - Synthese 131 (2):191-213.
Individuality and Selection.David L. Hull - 1980 - Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11:311-332.
Citations of this work
Why Wake the Dead? Identity and De-Extinction.Christopher Hunter Lean - 2020 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 33 (3-6):571-589.
A Pragmatic Approach to the Possibility of de-Extinction.Matthew H. Slater & Hayley Clatterbuck - 2018 - Biology and Philosophy 33 (1-2):4.
Meet the New Mammoth, Same as the Old? Resurrecting the Mammuthus Primigenius.Monika Piotrowska - 2018 - Biology and Philosophy 33 (1-2):5.
De-Extinction and the Conception of Species.Leonard Finkelman - 2018 - Biology and Philosophy 33 (5-6):32.
Similar books and articles
De-Extinction as Artificial Species Selection.Derek Turner - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (4):395-411.
The Nature of Extinction.Julien Delord - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 38 (3):656-667.
A Case for Resurrecting Lost Species—Review Essay of Beth Shapiro’s, “How to Clone a Mammoth: The Science of De-Extinction”.Douglas Campbell - 2016 - Biology and Philosophy 31 (5):747-759.
Promoting Biodiversity.Christopher Gyngell & Julian Savulescu - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (4):413-426.
The Cladistic Solution to the Species Problem.Mark Ridley - 1989 - Biology and Philosophy 4 (1):1-16.
Who Loves Mosquitoes? Care Ethics, Theory of Obligation and Endangered Species.Eleni Panagiotarakou - 2016 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (6):1057-1070.
Biodiversity Surgery: Some Epistemological Challenges in Facing Extinction.Elena Casetta & Jorge Marques da Silva - 2015 - Axiomathes 25 (3):239-251.
The Darwinian Revolution Revisited.Sandra Herbert - 2005 - Journal of the History of Biology 38 (1):51 - 66.
Bioinvasion, Globalization, and the Contingency of Cultural and Biological Diversity: Some Ecosemiotic Observations.Claus Emmeche - 2001 - Σημιοτκή-Sign Systems Studies 1 (1):237-262.