Neoliberalising bioethics: Bias, enhancement and economistic ethics

Kean Birch

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    In bioethics there is an ongoing debate about the ethical case for human enhancement through new biomedical technologies. In this debate there are both supporters and opponents of human enhancement technologies such as genetic improvements of cognitive abilities (eg, intelligence). The supporters argue that human enhancement will lead to healthier and therefore better lives, meaning that any delays to the introduction of such technologies is problematic. In contrast, the opponents argue that new technologies will not solve problems such as inequality and social justice. In order to overcome opposition to human enhancement, Bostrom and Ord have outlined a test to evaluate ethical arguments for 'status quo bias' or what they call 'intuitive judgements' in the assessment of human enhancement. This article is a response to their paper in which I raise a number of problems with their position, particularly with their 'status quo bias' test and the incorporation of economistic thinking into their ethical arguments.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages1-10
    Number of pages9
    JournalGenomics, Society and Policy
    Volume4
    Issue number2
    Publication statusPublished - 2008

    Fingerprint

    bioethics
    new technology
    moral philosophy
    cognitive ability
    trend
    social justice
    intelligence
    opposition

    Keywords

    • neoliberalism
    • bioethics
    • transhumanism
    • economistic ethics

    Cite this

    @article{020415a675834c0c8418d8f23c0de586,
    title = "Neoliberalising bioethics: Bias, enhancement and economistic ethics",
    abstract = "In bioethics there is an ongoing debate about the ethical case for human enhancement through new biomedical technologies. In this debate there are both supporters and opponents of human enhancement technologies such as genetic improvements of cognitive abilities (eg, intelligence). The supporters argue that human enhancement will lead to healthier and therefore better lives, meaning that any delays to the introduction of such technologies is problematic. In contrast, the opponents argue that new technologies will not solve problems such as inequality and social justice. In order to overcome opposition to human enhancement, Bostrom and Ord have outlined a test to evaluate ethical arguments for 'status quo bias' or what they call 'intuitive judgements' in the assessment of human enhancement. This article is a response to their paper in which I raise a number of problems with their position, particularly with their 'status quo bias' test and the incorporation of economistic thinking into their ethical arguments.",
    keywords = "neoliberalism, bioethics, transhumanism, economistic ethics",
    author = "Kean Birch",
    year = "2008",
    language = "English",
    volume = "4",
    pages = "1--10",
    journal = "Genomics, Society and Policy",
    issn = "1746-5354",
    number = "2",

    }

    Neoliberalising bioethics: Bias, enhancement and economistic ethics. / Birch, Kean.

    In: Genomics, Society and Policy, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2008, p. 1-10.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Neoliberalising bioethics: Bias, enhancement and economistic ethics

    AU - Birch, Kean

    PY - 2008

    Y1 - 2008

    N2 - In bioethics there is an ongoing debate about the ethical case for human enhancement through new biomedical technologies. In this debate there are both supporters and opponents of human enhancement technologies such as genetic improvements of cognitive abilities (eg, intelligence). The supporters argue that human enhancement will lead to healthier and therefore better lives, meaning that any delays to the introduction of such technologies is problematic. In contrast, the opponents argue that new technologies will not solve problems such as inequality and social justice. In order to overcome opposition to human enhancement, Bostrom and Ord have outlined a test to evaluate ethical arguments for 'status quo bias' or what they call 'intuitive judgements' in the assessment of human enhancement. This article is a response to their paper in which I raise a number of problems with their position, particularly with their 'status quo bias' test and the incorporation of economistic thinking into their ethical arguments.

    AB - In bioethics there is an ongoing debate about the ethical case for human enhancement through new biomedical technologies. In this debate there are both supporters and opponents of human enhancement technologies such as genetic improvements of cognitive abilities (eg, intelligence). The supporters argue that human enhancement will lead to healthier and therefore better lives, meaning that any delays to the introduction of such technologies is problematic. In contrast, the opponents argue that new technologies will not solve problems such as inequality and social justice. In order to overcome opposition to human enhancement, Bostrom and Ord have outlined a test to evaluate ethical arguments for 'status quo bias' or what they call 'intuitive judgements' in the assessment of human enhancement. This article is a response to their paper in which I raise a number of problems with their position, particularly with their 'status quo bias' test and the incorporation of economistic thinking into their ethical arguments.

    KW - neoliberalism

    KW - bioethics

    KW - transhumanism

    KW - economistic ethics

    UR - http://www.gspjournal.com/

    M3 - Article

    VL - 4

    SP - 1

    EP - 10

    JO - Genomics, Society and Policy

    T2 - Genomics, Society and Policy

    JF - Genomics, Society and Policy

    SN - 1746-5354

    IS - 2

    ER -