Article info
PDFExtended essay
Technological moral enhancement or traditional moral progress? Why not both?
- Correspondence to Dr Joao Fabiano, Department of Philosophy, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil; jlafabiano{at}gmail.com
Citation
Technological moral enhancement or traditional moral progress? Why not both?
Publication history
- Received October 24, 2019
- Revised February 11, 2020
- Accepted March 11, 2020
- First published March 30, 2020.
Online issue publication
May 29, 2020
Article Versions
- Previous version (30 March 2020).
- 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
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- The perils of failing to enhance: a response to Persson and Savulescu
- Too good for this world: moral bioenhancement and the ethics of making moral misfits
- Reply to commentators on Unfit for the Future
- Why we can't really say what post-persons are
- ‘My child will never initiate Ultimate Harm’: an argument against moral enhancement
- Moral enhancement, freedom, and what we (should) value in moral behaviour
- Why is it possible to enhance moral status and why doing so is wrong?
- Freedom and moral enhancement
- Voluntary moral enhancement and the survival-at-any-cost bias
- Amoral enhancement