种系增强,不平等和(In)平等主义精神

Oliver Feeney
{"title":"种系增强,不平等和(In)平等主义精神","authors":"Oliver Feeney","doi":"10.2202/1941-6008.1122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In most discussions of the social justice implications of new genetic technologies, enhancements are considered to be highly contentious. This is particularly so when we speak of enhancements that benefit the recipient in positional terms and enhancements that are germ-line and which can be passed on to future generations. I argue that the egalitarian reluctance, as displayed by Max Mehlman (2003:2005), to permitting enhancements is overblown. Recent writings from Buchanan (2008) and Farrelly (2004) highlight a more positive, context-dependent, role for permitting the socio-economically advantaged the freedom to gain access to enhancements, including enhancements of traits associated with positional or competitive advantage. I argue that this reasoning also (necessarily) applies to germ-line enhancements or, at least, to 'effective germ-line enhancements.' In other words, I argue that such enhancements should be more seriously considered in terms of this positive context-dependent role. Nevertheless, this support is not unqualified. I critically re-examine concerns regarding the notion of the genetic underclass and I raise some worries about the possible adverse consequence of such a regulatory framework on sustaining the required egalitarian ethos. Importantly, such worries (and suggestions to address them) will be focused on the adverse effects of inequalities, rather than germ-line enhancements themselves.","PeriodicalId":88318,"journal":{"name":"Studies in ethics, law, and technology","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1941-6008.1122","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Germ-line Enhancements, Inequalities and the (In)egalitarian Ethos\",\"authors\":\"Oliver Feeney\",\"doi\":\"10.2202/1941-6008.1122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In most discussions of the social justice implications of new genetic technologies, enhancements are considered to be highly contentious. This is particularly so when we speak of enhancements that benefit the recipient in positional terms and enhancements that are germ-line and which can be passed on to future generations. I argue that the egalitarian reluctance, as displayed by Max Mehlman (2003:2005), to permitting enhancements is overblown. Recent writings from Buchanan (2008) and Farrelly (2004) highlight a more positive, context-dependent, role for permitting the socio-economically advantaged the freedom to gain access to enhancements, including enhancements of traits associated with positional or competitive advantage. I argue that this reasoning also (necessarily) applies to germ-line enhancements or, at least, to 'effective germ-line enhancements.' In other words, I argue that such enhancements should be more seriously considered in terms of this positive context-dependent role. Nevertheless, this support is not unqualified. I critically re-examine concerns regarding the notion of the genetic underclass and I raise some worries about the possible adverse consequence of such a regulatory framework on sustaining the required egalitarian ethos. Importantly, such worries (and suggestions to address them) will be focused on the adverse effects of inequalities, rather than germ-line enhancements themselves.\",\"PeriodicalId\":88318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in ethics, law, and technology\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1941-6008.1122\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in ethics, law, and technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1122\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in ethics, law, and technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1941-6008.1122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在大多数关于新基因技术的社会正义影响的讨论中,增强被认为是极具争议的。当我们谈到在地位方面对接受者有利的增强和可以传递给后代的生殖系增强时,尤其如此。我认为,马克思•梅尔曼(Max Mehlman, 2003:2005)所表现出的平等主义不愿允许改进的观点被夸大了。Buchanan(2008)和Farrelly(2004)最近的文章强调了一个更积极的、情境依赖的角色,允许社会经济优势的人自由地获得增强,包括与位置或竞争优势相关的特征的增强。我认为,这种推理也(必然)适用于生殖系增强,或者至少适用于“有效的生殖系增强”。换句话说,我认为这种增强应该更认真地考虑这种积极的上下文依赖角色。然而,这种支持不是没有条件的。我批判性地重新审视了对遗传下层阶级概念的关注,并对这种监管框架在维持所需的平等主义精神方面可能产生的不利后果提出了一些担忧。重要的是,这些担忧(以及解决这些担忧的建议)将集中在不平等的不利影响上,而不是生殖系增强本身。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Germ-line Enhancements, Inequalities and the (In)egalitarian Ethos
In most discussions of the social justice implications of new genetic technologies, enhancements are considered to be highly contentious. This is particularly so when we speak of enhancements that benefit the recipient in positional terms and enhancements that are germ-line and which can be passed on to future generations. I argue that the egalitarian reluctance, as displayed by Max Mehlman (2003:2005), to permitting enhancements is overblown. Recent writings from Buchanan (2008) and Farrelly (2004) highlight a more positive, context-dependent, role for permitting the socio-economically advantaged the freedom to gain access to enhancements, including enhancements of traits associated with positional or competitive advantage. I argue that this reasoning also (necessarily) applies to germ-line enhancements or, at least, to 'effective germ-line enhancements.' In other words, I argue that such enhancements should be more seriously considered in terms of this positive context-dependent role. Nevertheless, this support is not unqualified. I critically re-examine concerns regarding the notion of the genetic underclass and I raise some worries about the possible adverse consequence of such a regulatory framework on sustaining the required egalitarian ethos. Importantly, such worries (and suggestions to address them) will be focused on the adverse effects of inequalities, rather than germ-line enhancements themselves.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Political Legitimacy Review of Reframing Rights: Bioconstitutionalism in the Genetic Age Review of Interfaces on Trial 2.0 From ICH to IBH in Biobanking? A Legal Perspective on Harmonization, Standardization and Unification The Price of Precaution and the Ethics of Risk
×
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