Article info
PDFTheoretical ethics
Paper
Human enhancement and perfection
- Correspondence to Johann AR Roduit, Institute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Zurich, Pestalozzistrasse 24, Zürich 8032, Switzerland; johann.roduit{at}ethik.uzh.ch
Citation
Human enhancement and perfection
Publication history
- Received July 4, 2012
- Revised January 22, 2013
- Accepted January 25, 2013
- First published February 22, 2013.
Online issue publication
February 20, 2018
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- Should we enhance animals?
- What is morally salient about enhancement technologies?
- Defending human enhancement technologies: unveiling normativity
- Transhumanism, medical technology and slippery slopes
- Why two arguments from probability fail and one argument from Thomson’s analogy of the violinist succeeds in justifying embryo destruction in some situations
- Are those who subscribe to the view that early embryos are persons irrational and inconsistent? A reply to Brock
- The perils of failing to enhance: a response to Persson and Savulescu
- An evaluative conservative case for biomedical enhancement
- American biofutures: ideology and utopia in the Fukuyama/Stock debate
- What are we to make of the charge that human biological enhancement technologies are ‘unnatural’?