Human/Non-Human Chimeras
Streiffer (Robert)
Source: Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 2009-14
Paper - Abstract

Paper SummaryNotes Citing this PaperText Colour-Conventions


Author’s Abstract

  1. A chimera is an individual composed of cells with different embryonic origins. The successful isolation of five human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines in 1998 increased scientists' ability to create human/nonhuman chimeras and prompted extensive bioethics discussion, resulting in what has been dubbed “the other stem cell debate” (Shreeve 2005).
  2. The debate about chimeras has focused on five main arguments.
    1. The Unnaturalness Argument explores the ethics of violating natural species boundaries.
    2. The Moral Confusion Argument alleges that the existence of entities that cannot be definitively classified as either human or non-human will cause moral confusion that will undermine valuable social and cultural practices.
    3. The Borderline-Personhood Argument focuses on great apes and concludes that their borderline-personhood confers a high enough degree of moral status to make most, if not all, chimeric research on them impermissible.
    4. The Human Dignity Argument claims that it is an affront to human dignity to give an individual “trapped” in the body of a non-human animal the capacities associated with human dignity.
    5. Finally, the Moral Status Framework maintains that research in which a nonhuman animal's moral status is enhanced to that of a normal adult human is impermissible unless reasonable assurances are in place that its new moral status will be respected, which is unlikely given the motivations for chimeric research and the oversight likely to be provided.
  3. These arguments provide different rationales for evaluating chimeric research and consequently differ in their implications both for the range of chimeric research that is unethical as well as the way chimeric research should be addressed in public policy.

Contents
  1. Introduction
  2. The Unnaturalness Argument
  3. The Moral Confusion Argument
  4. The Borderline-Personhood Argument
  5. The Human Dignity Argument
  6. The Moral Status Framework
  7. Conclusion

Comment:

First published Thu May 21, 2009; substantive revision Mon Jul 21, 2014

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2018
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)



© Theo Todman, June 2007 - May 2018. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. 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