Article info
PDFCommentary
A question about defining moral bioenhancement
- Correspondence to Dr Nicholas Agar, Victoria University of Wellington, Philosophy Program, Wellington 6140, New Zealand; nicholas.agar{at}vuw.ac.nz
Citation
A question about defining moral bioenhancement
Publication history
- Received November 10, 2012
- Revised November 10, 2012
- Accepted November 26, 2012
- First published January 25, 2013.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Article Versions
- Previous version (27 April 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
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
- Moral enhancement, freedom, and what we (should) value in moral behaviour
- Reply to commentators on Unfit for the Future
- Moral bioenhancement is dangerous
- Too good for this world: moral bioenhancement and the ethics of making moral misfits
- Voluntary moral enhancement and the survival-at-any-cost bias
- Frequently overlooked realistic moral bioenhancement interventions
- Are we unfit for the future?
- Moral bioenhancement, freedom and reasoning
- Taking liberties with free fall
- The moral bioenhancement of psychopaths