Germ-Line Enhancement of Humans and Nonhumans
, The current difference in attitude toward germ-line enhancement in humans and nonhumans is unjustified. Society should be more cautious in modifying the genes of nonhumans and more bold in thinking about modifying our own genome. I identify four classes of arguments pertaining to germ-line enhance...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
2005
|
| In: |
Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal
Year: 2005, Volume: 15, Issue: 1, Pages: 57-76 |
| Online Access: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 182698710X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20221214052548.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 221214s2005 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1353/ken.2005.0005 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)182698710X | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP182698710X | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Loftis, J. Robert |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Germ-Line Enhancement of Humans and Nonhumans |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2005 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a , The current difference in attitude toward germ-line enhancement in humans and nonhumans is unjustified. Society should be more cautious in modifying the genes of nonhumans and more bold in thinking about modifying our own genome. I identify four classes of arguments pertaining to germ-line enhancement: safety arguments, justice arguments, trust arguments, and naturalness arguments. The first three types are compelling, but do not distinguish between human and nonhuman cases. The final class of argument would justify a distinction between human and nonhuman germ-line enhancement; however, this type of argument fails and, therefore, the discrepancy in attitude toward human and nonhuman germ-line enhancement is unjustified. | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |a Kennedy Institute of Ethics |t Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal |d Baltimore, Md. : Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1991 |g 15(2005), 1, Seite 57-76 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320481840 |w (DE-600)2009887-X |w (DE-576)266818668 |x 1086-3249 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:15 |g year:2005 |g number:1 |g pages:57-76 |
| 856 | |u https://philpapers.org/archive/LOFGEO.pdf |x unpaywall |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang |h repository [oa repository (via OAI-PMH title and first author match)] | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2005.0005 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/180771 |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 4230897979 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 182698710X | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20221214052548 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 221214||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-12-05#2B2BD69C5EF7E7F9F2DB2A268A22E0FB09FA524C | ||
| 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 | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||