Kant and the enhancement debate: Imperfect duties and perfecting ourselves

Bioethics 35 (8):801-811 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay develops a Kantian approach to the permissibility of biomedical physical, cognitive, and moral enhancement. Kant holds that human beings have an imperfect duty to promote their physical, cognitive, and moral perfection. While an agent’s individual circumstances may limit the means she may permissibly use to enhance herself, whether biomedically or otherwise, I argue (1) that biomedical means of enhancing oneself are, generally speaking, both permissible and meritorious from a Kantian perspective. Despite often being equally permissible, I also argue (2) that enhancing oneself by more traditional means is, generally speaking, more meritorious (and involves the display of more virtue) than enhancing oneself by biomedical means. Nevertheless, since Kant does not fault agents for acting less meritoriously (or for displaying less virtue) than they otherwise could, I also argue (3) that those who opt for permissible biomedical enhancement over more traditional forms are not blameworthy for doing so. I also consider and reject several objections to these claims, including that biomedical enhancements (1) are too passive to count as actions by the agent who enhances herself, (2) involve a failure of the agent to treat her humanity as an end in itself or to show proper respect for her dignity, (3) might be undertaken on the basis of motives that undermine their permissibility, (4) are likely to exacerbate existing social and economic inequalities in ways that do the same, and (5) in their moral form are incompatible with Kant’s conception of duty and human freedom.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,290

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

Integration of cognitive and moral enhancement.Vojin Rakic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):91-103.
Climate change and human moral enhancement.Tvrtko Jolic - 2014 - In Mladen Domazet & Dinka Marinovic Jerolimov (eds.), Sustainability Perspectives from the European Semi-periphery. Institute for social research. pp. 79-91.
Human enhancement and supra-personal moral status.Thomas Douglas - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 162 (3):473-497.
Where moral enhancement goes wrong. 추병완 - 2014 - Journal of Ethics: The Korean Association of Ethics 1 (98):67-82.
Moral enhancement.Thomas Douglas - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-04

Downloads
131 (#166,521)

6 months
7 (#671,981)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brian A. Chance
University of Oklahoma

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references