Metz on Enhancement: A Relational Critique

IF 1 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Ethical Theory and Moral Practice Pub Date : 2023-10-07 DOI:10.1007/s10677-023-10419-8
Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues, Cornelius Ewuoso
{"title":"Metz on Enhancement: A Relational Critique","authors":"Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues, Cornelius Ewuoso","doi":"10.1007/s10677-023-10419-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Thaddeus Metz’s groundbreaking book A Relational Moral Theory provides a sophisticated moral theory hailing from the Global South. In this book, one of the theses he defends is that biotechnological enhancement is generally morally impermissible. This article, written for a book symposium on A Relational Moral Theory , primarily demonstrates how Metz’s criticisms presented in his book fail to convince. Furthermore, we explore some possible objections from Metzian deontology against enhancement and also show that these do not imply that enhancement is intrinsically wrong. Finally, we showed how Metzian ethics offers good reasons to support rather than oppose enhancement.","PeriodicalId":47052,"journal":{"name":"Ethical Theory and Moral Practice","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethical Theory and Moral Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-023-10419-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Thaddeus Metz’s groundbreaking book A Relational Moral Theory provides a sophisticated moral theory hailing from the Global South. In this book, one of the theses he defends is that biotechnological enhancement is generally morally impermissible. This article, written for a book symposium on A Relational Moral Theory , primarily demonstrates how Metz’s criticisms presented in his book fail to convince. Furthermore, we explore some possible objections from Metzian deontology against enhancement and also show that these do not imply that enhancement is intrinsically wrong. Finally, we showed how Metzian ethics offers good reasons to support rather than oppose enhancement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
梅斯论增强:一种关系批判
梅斯的开创性著作《关系道德理论》提供了一个来自全球南方的复杂道德理论。在这本书中,他捍卫的一个论点是,生物技术增强通常在道德上是不允许的。这篇文章是为《关系道德理论》一书研讨会写的,主要展示了梅斯在他的书中提出的批评是如何无法令人信服的。此外,我们探讨了一些可能反对增强的梅兹义务论,也表明这些并不意味着增强本质上是错误的。最后,我们展示了Metzian伦理学如何为支持而不是反对增强提供了很好的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice is a double-anonymous peer-reviewed philosophical journal which aims to publish the best work produced in all fields of practical philosophy. It welcomes high-quality, rigorous and original, submissions regardless of the traditions or schools of thought from which they derive. As an editorial priority, however, published papers should be accessible to the philosophical community at large and as free as possible of unnecessary jargon. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice publishes work on ethical theories that address practical problems, as well as work that presents or examines empirical findings regarding moral practices relevant for ethical theorizing. The journal therefore actively seeks to promote cross-fertilization across areas of practical philosophy—such as moral, political, legal, and social philosophy—and more empirical disciplines, such as medicine, economics, sociology, political science, and psychology. It welcomes work in applied ethics provided that it can offer theoretical or normative contributions to larger philosophical debates. The journal also considers historically-oriented contributions provided they are not mainly exegetical and can offer insights for current debates in practical philosophy. The journal endorses the BPA/ SWIP-UK Good Practice for Journals. Further details are available in our Review Policy document.
期刊最新文献
Knowledge Versus Understanding: What Drives Moral Progress? The Neurocorrective Offer and Manipulative Pressure Influencer-Centered Accounts of Manipulation The Distributive Demands of Relational Egalitarianism Instrumental Needs: A Relational Account
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1