Article Text
Abstract
In her recent article, Prince has identified a critical challenge for those who advocate genetic enhancement to reduce social injustices. The gene–environment interaction prevents genetic enhancement from having equitable effects at the phenotypic level, even if enhancement were available to the entire population. The poor would benefit less than the rich from their improved genes because their genotypes would interact with more unfavourable socioeconomic environments. Therefore, Prince believes that genetic enhancement should not be used to combat social inequalities, since it can likely aggravate them. In this article, I raise various objections to this conclusion. I argue first that genetic enhancement need not necessarily magnify social injustices. I then show that genetic enhancement can play a modest but not insignificant role in the quest for social justice in the future. Finally, I conclude by arguing for the need to consider the complex interplay between the social lottery and the natural lottery in our aspirations for justice linked to genetic technologies.
- Enhancement
- Ethics
- Genetic Enhancement
- Philosophy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Gene–environment interaction: why genetic enhancement might never be distributed fairly
- Genes and equality
- Whereto speculative bioethics? Technological visions and future simulations in a science fictional culture
- I'll be a monkey's uncle: a moral challenge to human genetic enhancement research
- The perils of failing to enhance: a response to Persson and Savulescu
- ‘My child will never initiate Ultimate Harm’: an argument against moral enhancement
- Reproductive technologies, risk, enhancement and the value of genetic relatedness
- Genetic enhancement, TED talks and the sense of wonder
- Genetic enhancements and expectations
- Possible people, complaints, and the distinction between genetic planning and genetic engineering