Weighing the moral status of brain organoids and research animals

IF 2.1 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-04-26 DOI:10.1111/bioe.13290
Julian J. Koplin
{"title":"Weighing the moral status of brain organoids and research animals","authors":"Julian J. Koplin","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent advances in human brain organoid systems have raised serious worries about the possibility that these in vitro ‘mini-brains’ could develop sentience, and thus, moral status. This article considers the relative moral status of sentient human brain organoids and research animals, examining whether we have moral reasons to prefer using one over the other. It argues that, contrary to common intuitions, the wellbeing of sentient human brain organoids should not be granted greater moral consideration than the wellbeing of nonhuman research animals. It does so not by denying that typical humans have higher moral status than animals, but instead by arguing that none of the leading justifications for granting humans higher moral status than nonhuman animals apply to brain organoids. Additionally, it argues that there are no good reasons to be more concerned about the well-being of human brain organoids compared to those generated from other species.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"38 5","pages":"410-418"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13290","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bioe.13290","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent advances in human brain organoid systems have raised serious worries about the possibility that these in vitro ‘mini-brains’ could develop sentience, and thus, moral status. This article considers the relative moral status of sentient human brain organoids and research animals, examining whether we have moral reasons to prefer using one over the other. It argues that, contrary to common intuitions, the wellbeing of sentient human brain organoids should not be granted greater moral consideration than the wellbeing of nonhuman research animals. It does so not by denying that typical humans have higher moral status than animals, but instead by arguing that none of the leading justifications for granting humans higher moral status than nonhuman animals apply to brain organoids. Additionally, it argues that there are no good reasons to be more concerned about the well-being of human brain organoids compared to those generated from other species.

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
权衡脑器官组织和研究动物的道德地位
人脑类器官系统的最新进展引发了人们对这些体外 "微型大脑 "是否可能发展出知觉并进而发展出道德地位的严重担忧。本文探讨了有知觉的人脑器官和研究动物的相对道德地位,研究了我们是否有道德理由选择使用其中一种而非另一种。文章认为,与通常的直觉相反,有生命的人脑器官的福祉不应比非人类研究动物的福祉得到更多的道德考虑。这并不是否认典型的人类比动物具有更高的道德地位,而是认为赋予人类比非人类动物更高的道德地位的主要理由都不适用于脑器官。此外,它还认为,与其他物种产生的脑器官相比,没有充分的理由更关注人类脑器官的福祉。
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
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
期刊最新文献
Clinical Ethicists and Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD): Possible Roles and Challenges. Absurdism, Moral Injury, and Value-Aligned Action in Acute Care. Vulnerability in Research Ethics? Issue Information Ethical Uncertainties: Diverging and Emerging Regulations of Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide and the Potential Role of Clinical Ethics
×
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:604180095
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