- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
An Argument against Arguments for Enhancement
Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1) (2007)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Author's Profile
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
Section I. Understanding the debate. Reason, emotion, and morality : some cautions for the enhancement project / C. A. J. Coady ; Repugnance as performance error : the role of disgust in bioethical intuitions / Joshua May ; Reasons, reflection, and repugnance / Doug McConnell and Jeanette Kennett ; A natural alliance against a common foe? Opponents of enhancement and the social model of disability / Linda Barclay ; Playing God : What is the problem? / John Weckert ; Conservative and critical morality in debate about reproductive technologies / John McMillan ; Human enhancement : conceptual clarity and moral significance / Chris Gyngell and Michael J. Selgelid ; Human enhancement for whom? [REVIEW]Robert Sparrow - 2016 - In Steve Clarke, Julian Savulescu, C. A. J. Coady, Alberto Giubilini & Sagar Sanyal (eds.), The Ethics of Human Enhancement: Understanding the Debate. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
In Support of Human Enhancement.Sarah Chan & John Harris - 2007 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
Genetic Enhancement and Procreative Autonomy.David Archard - 2007 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
Athlete or Guinea Pig? Sports and Enhancement Research.Nancy M. P. King & Richard Robeson - 2007 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 1 (1).
Review of The Case against Perfection. [REVIEW]Keith Abney - 2009 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2 (3).
Michael J. Sandel, the case against perfection: Ethics in the age of genetic engineering. [REVIEW]Corey McCall - 2010 - Journal of Value Inquiry 44 (2):241-245.
Analytics
Added to PP
2010-09-14
Downloads
121 (#179,307)
6 months
12 (#299,634)
2010-09-14
Downloads
121 (#179,307)
6 months
12 (#299,634)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Ethics of Human Enhancement: 25 Questions & Answers.Fritz Allhoff, Patrick Lin, James Moor & John Weckert - 2010 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (1).
Toward a Legitimate Public Policy on Cognition-Enhancement Drugs.Veljko Dubljevic - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 3 (3):29-33.
Why Diversity Matters: Understanding and Applying the Diversity Component of the National Science Foundation’s Broader Impacts Criterion.Kristen Intemann - 2009 - Social Epistemology 23 (3):249-266.
Defending human enhancement technologies: unveiling normativity.Inmaculada de Melo-Martin - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (8):483-487.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-fcc9b7db9-hmqz7 uwo