Is Enhancement Worthy of Being a Right?
Hopkins (Patrick D.)
Source: More & Vita-More - The Transhumanist Reader, Part VII - Chapter 33
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsDisclaimer

Editors’ Abstract1

  1. In a piece that effectively complements "Sandberg (Anders) - Morphological Freedom - Why We Not Just Want It, but Need It", Patrick D. Hopkins considers the problems that may arise if we put the question of enhancement in terms of rights.
  2. Although rights language does have theoretical problems, such language plays a powerful role in the moral and legal landscape.
  3. But if transhumanists2 are to engage in talks of rights, they should understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of basing rights on appeals to autonomy, interests, and natural law.
  4. He finds the appeal to autonomy to be the weakest strategy.
  5. Appeals to interests - those things widely recognized as valuable, worthwhile, and even necessary for a life worth having had - and to the values of natural law - life, health, knowledge, and sociability - help show that enhancements can be noble and worthy and not unnatural or alien to human nature.

In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1: Taken from "More (Max) & Vita-More (Natasha) - Transhumanism: Biopolitics and Policy - Introduction".

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2019
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)

© Theo Todman, June 2007 - Feb 2019. Please address any comments on this page to File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page