Animal genetic manipulation – a utilitarian response

Bioethics 16 (1):55–71 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I examine the process and outcomes of animal genetic manipulation (‘transgenesis’) with reference to its morally salient features. I consider several objections to transgenesis. I examine and reject the alleged intrinsic wrongness of ‘deliberate genetic sequence alteration’, as I do the notion that transgenesis may lead to human genetic manipulation. I examine the alleged wrongness of killing inherent in transgenesis, and suggest that the concept of ‘replaceability’ successfully justifies such killing, although not for entities deemed to possess ‘personhood’. I examine ‘significant suffering’ associated with transgenesis and propose the radical conclusion that, although it would be wrong to prohibit animal genetic manipulation per se, utilitarians ought to support a ‘default prohibition’ on transgenic experiments that entail significant suffering.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,846

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

How to Manipulate an Incompatibilistically Free Agent.Roger Clarke - 2012 - American Philosophical Quarterly 49 (2):139-49.
John Maynard Smith’s notion of animal signals.Ulrich E. Stegmann - 2005 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (5):1011-1025.
Genetic engineering and the integrity of animals.Rob De Vries - 2006 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (5):469-493.
The concept of intrinsic value and transgenic animals.H. Verhoog - 1992 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):147-160.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
35 (#456,100)

6 months
5 (#637,009)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kevin Smith
DeVRY Institute of Technology, Columbus

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references