Much bioethical discussion has been devoted to the subject of human enhancement through various technological means such as genetic modification. Although many of the same technologies could be, indeed in many cases already have been, applied to non-human animals, there has been very little consideration of the concept of “animal enhancement”, at least not in those specific terms. This paper addresses the notion of animal enhancement and the ethical issues surrounding it. A definition of animal enhancement is proposed that provides a framework within which to consider these issues; and it is argued that if human enhancement can be considered to be a moral obligation, so too can animal enhancement.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Lessons from Frankenstein 200 years on: brain organoids, chimaeras and other ‘monsters’
- Genetic enhancement, post-persons and moral status: a reply to Buchanan
- Why is it possible to enhance moral status and why doing so is wrong?
- I'll be a monkey's uncle: a moral challenge to human genetic enhancement research
- The biomedical enhancement of moral status
- ‘My child will never initiate Ultimate Harm’: an argument against moral enhancement
- Moral uncertainty and the farming of human-pig chimeras
- What moral status should be accorded to those human beings who have profound intellectual disabilities? A reply to Curtis and Vehmas
- The perils of failing to enhance: a response to Persson and Savulescu
- Infanticide and moral consistency