Implications of moral uncertainty: implausible or just unpalatable?

Setting aside some complexities, Koplin and Wilkinson1 argue:Moral status is uncertain if there is a non-zero chance that an entity has, or would develop, full moral status.If its moral status is uncertain, then moral caution is warranted towards that entity.The moral status of both non-chimeric pig...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: King, Mike (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2019
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2019, Volume: 45, Issue: 7, Pages: 451-452
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1816160342
003 DE-627
005 20230428063517.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2019-105588  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816160342 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816160342 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)1125889748  |0 (DE-627)880450487  |0 (DE-576)483594717  |4 aut  |a King, Mike 
109 |a King, Mike 
245 1 0 |a Implications of moral uncertainty: implausible or just unpalatable? 
264 1 |c 2019 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Setting aside some complexities, Koplin and Wilkinson1 argue:Moral status is uncertain if there is a non-zero chance that an entity has, or would develop, full moral status.If its moral status is uncertain, then moral caution is warranted towards that entity.The moral status of both non-chimeric pigs and human-pig chimaeras is uncertain.(Conclusion 1) Therefore, consistency demands that moral caution is warranted towards both non-chimeric pigs and human-pig chimaeras.The commonly held view is that moral caution is warranted towards human-pig chimaeras, but not non-chimeric pigs.(Conclusion 2) Therefore, the commonly held view is inconsistent. This is a valid argument. The authors claim that the inconsistency they expose in conclusion 2 could be resolved in favour of either commonly held view, or by revising both to equivalency. However, it is clear from conclusion 1, and the paper more generally, that the authors are arguing for moral caution to be applied to the treatment of pigs of both types.I will focus on evaluating premises 1 and 2, and the generalisability of the argument in light of this. In doing so, I will attempt to show that the argument has implausible logical implications, and that the moral caution warranted towards human-pig chimaeras of uncertain moral status does not require confidence that they lack full moral status, as the authors claim.According to premise 1, if an entity might currently have moral … 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 45(2019), 7, Seite 451-452  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:45  |g year:2019  |g number:7  |g pages:451-452 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105588  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/45/7/451.abstract  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185614292 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816160342 
LOK |0 005 20220908053736 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#B65E5ACEEC9F4754EB8E0F190D16D63C13EA4116 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1  |b inherited from superior work 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw