Questions of Human Enhancement
As advances in medicine and the life-sciences continue offer the opportunity to “enhance” humans and other species, it becomes clear that the discussion of human enhancement raises questions in philosophy, religion, science, medicine, sociology, history, law, and many other disciplines. From a balanced and interdisciplinary position, this thematic issue seeks to address some of these concerns and questions that are faced by policy makers and practitioners alike, including:
What constitutes enhancement?
- Is enhancement desirable, and if so for whom?
- What are the positive and negative consequences of enhancement for the individual and society?
- Is enhancement another word for eugenics?
- How is enhancement different from therapy?
- How long should we live?
This thematic issue includes a number of papers that are drawn from a special panel titled “Bigger, Better, Best: Discussions on Human Enhancement” presented by the ESRC Centre for Economic and Social Aspects of Genomics (CESAGen), Lancaster University, at the 19th Annual Conference of the European Society for Philosophy of Health Care and Medicine in Barcelona (August 2005), as well as contributions from a wide range of leading scholars.
Editorials
Questions of Human Enhancement: An Editorial
Anthony Mark Cutter and Bert Gordijn
Comments
In Support of Human Enhancement
Sarah Chan and John Harris
An Argument against Arguments for Enhancement
Michael J. Selgelid
Articles
Athlete or Guinea Pig? Sports and Enhancement Research
Nancy M. P. King and Richard Robeson
Enhancement in Sport, and Enhancement outside Sport
Thomas Douglas
Virtue Ethics and Prenatal Genetic Enhancement
Colin Farrelly
Liberal Freedoms: Enhancement Is/nt Eugenics?
Paul McCarthy
Genetic Enhancement and Procreative Autonomy
David Archard
Discussions
Life Span Extension Research and Public Debate: Societal Considerations
Aubrey D.N.J de Grey
Medical Nanorobotics: Breaking the Trance of Futility in Life Extension Research (A Reply to de Grey)
Robert A. Freitas Jr.
Should We 'Cure' Aging? A Reply to de Grey
Gregor Wolbring
