Savulescu: Genetic Interventions and the Ethics of Enhancement of Human Beings

Question 1

basic goal

Answer 1

1. to demonstrate that we have moral obligations to use genetic enhancements to improve children’s lives (not just permission)
2. consequentialist arguments about creating more happiness

Question 2

Argument 1

Answer 2

wrong to not enhance when you can

Question 3

argument 1: wrong to not enhance when you can

Answer 3

1. neglectful parent: fails to sustain a child’s exceptional abilities, lapses back to normal
2. lazy parent: fails to improve a child from normal to exceptional
3. both are equally wrong: failure to improve is as wrong as failure to sustain benefit
4. substitute “biological enhancement” for “diet enhancement” and you get the same moral result

Question 4

argument 2

Answer 4

consistency

Question 5

argument 2: consistency

Answer 5

1. genetic enhancements seem different than diet or environment
2. we accept environmental interventions as sometimes obligatory to improve children. education, diet, training. aren’t these reversible?
3. reversible enhancements are okay, but not the irreversible such as genetic enhancements
4. reply: many environmental changes are irreversible (605)
5. we ought to, consistently, accept genetic interventions

Question 6

argument 3

Answer 6

no difference than treating disease

Question 7

argument 3: no difference than treating disease

Answer 7

1. treating/preventing a disease is morally good because health is a value
2. but health is only instrumentally valuable - a means to live a good life
3. other all-purpose characteristics are valuable regardless of what one takes to be a good life (intelligence, memory, empathy, etc.)
4. if we accept treatment/prevention of disease to restore us to health because it is instrumentally valuable, then we must accept enhancement of other instrumentally valuable qualities
5. consider moral character (607)

Question 8

how do we decide

Answer 8

• don’t base it on: god/nature, experts, authorities

- base in on the liberal state

Question 9

liberal state

Answer 9

• is neutral about people’s conception of the good life

- allows people liberty and autonomy to choose

Question 10

what are the limits on what the liberal state should provide?

Answer 10

safety, harm to others, distributive justice

Question 11

principle of procreative liberty and autonomy

Answer 11

two reasons to extend this to genetic enhancement:
1. privacy
2. we need “experiments in living” now understood as “experiments in reproduction” in order to make sure that we give children the best prospects
see the five limit list (609)

Question 12

note

Answer 12

the procreative liberty to enhance children actually may increase possibilities and therefore does not violate the child’s right to an open future. what do you think? (610)

Question 13

objection 1

Answer 13

playing god/against nature

Question 14

objection 1: playing god/against nature

reply 1

Answer 14

we interfere in many ways (treating injury, disease) p. 610

Question 15

objection 1: playing god/against nature

reply 2

Answer 15

we should be cautious about limited knowledge

- use it at first to choose between embryos, not change a being

Question 16

objection 1: playing god/against nature

reply 3

Answer 16

evolution only increases chances for survival but hardly the best quality of life

Question 17

Objection two

Answer 17

genetic discrimination

Question 18

objection two: genetic discrimination

Answer 18

1. nature already distributes advantages unfairly
2. how well the disadvantages live depends on social institutions that protect the least well off from discrimination
3. no necessary connection between enhancement and discrimination just as no necessary connection between curing disability and discrimination against people with disability
4. p. 611

Question 19

objection 3

Answer 19

destroys mystery and diversity

Question 20

objection 3: destroys mystery and diversity

reply 1

Answer 20

people will continue to value different things

Question 21

objection 3: destroys mystery and diversity

reply 2

Answer 21

it will never be possible to create the perfect human - many factors will still influence people turn out

Question 22

objection 4

Answer 22

against human nature

Question 23

objection 4: against human nature

Answer 23

reply: genetic enhancement is actually a good way to express our nature

Question 24

objection 5

Answer 24

enhancements are self-defeating

Question 25

objection 5: enhancements are self-defeating

Answer 25

if everyone enhances, the result won’t be “enhancement” but equality. there will be no gain or advantage

Question 26

objection 5: enhancements are self-defeating

reply

Answer 26

some valuable traits like “intelligence” are non-positional. they are good for the person even if they don’t supply competitive advantages

Question 27

what is an ethical enhancement

Answer 27

1. discuss the 8 factors (p. 612)
2. discuss the 3 for children/incompetents
3. which are the strongest? which are vulnerable to objections?