Details
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 187-210 |
Number of pages | 24 |
Journal | Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom) |
Volume | 43 |
Issue number | 2 |
Early online date | 13 Mar 2018 |
Publication status | Published - Apr 2018 |
Abstract
The prospect of creating and using human-animal chimeras and hybrids (HACHs) that are significantly human-like in their composition, phenotype, cognition, or behavior meets with divergent moral judgments: On the one side, it is claimed that such beings might be candidates for human-analogous rights to protection and care; on the other side, it is supposed that their existence might disturb fundamental natural and social orders. This paper tries to show that both positions are paradoxically intertwined: They rely on two kinds of species arguments, "individual species arguments" and "group species arguments," which formulate opposing demands but are conceptually interdependent. As a consequence, the existence of HACHs may challenge exactly those normative standards on which the protection of HACHs may eventually be based. This ethical paradox could constitute the ultimate source of the "moral confusion" that some authors have suspected HACHs to provoke.
Keywords
- Chimeras, Ethical Paradox, Human-animal mixtures, hybrids, moral confusion, species arguments
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Nursing(all)
- Issues, ethics and legal aspects
- Arts and Humanities(all)
- Philosophy
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom), Vol. 43, No. 2, 04.2018, p. 187-210.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Human-Animal Chimeras and Hybrids: An Ethical Paradox behind Moral Confusion?
AU - Hübner, Dietmar
PY - 2018/4
Y1 - 2018/4
N2 - The prospect of creating and using human-animal chimeras and hybrids (HACHs) that are significantly human-like in their composition, phenotype, cognition, or behavior meets with divergent moral judgments: On the one side, it is claimed that such beings might be candidates for human-analogous rights to protection and care; on the other side, it is supposed that their existence might disturb fundamental natural and social orders. This paper tries to show that both positions are paradoxically intertwined: They rely on two kinds of species arguments, "individual species arguments" and "group species arguments," which formulate opposing demands but are conceptually interdependent. As a consequence, the existence of HACHs may challenge exactly those normative standards on which the protection of HACHs may eventually be based. This ethical paradox could constitute the ultimate source of the "moral confusion" that some authors have suspected HACHs to provoke.
AB - The prospect of creating and using human-animal chimeras and hybrids (HACHs) that are significantly human-like in their composition, phenotype, cognition, or behavior meets with divergent moral judgments: On the one side, it is claimed that such beings might be candidates for human-analogous rights to protection and care; on the other side, it is supposed that their existence might disturb fundamental natural and social orders. This paper tries to show that both positions are paradoxically intertwined: They rely on two kinds of species arguments, "individual species arguments" and "group species arguments," which formulate opposing demands but are conceptually interdependent. As a consequence, the existence of HACHs may challenge exactly those normative standards on which the protection of HACHs may eventually be based. This ethical paradox could constitute the ultimate source of the "moral confusion" that some authors have suspected HACHs to provoke.
KW - Chimeras
KW - Ethical Paradox
KW - Human-animal mixtures
KW - hybrids
KW - moral confusion
KW - species arguments
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044299038&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/jmp/jhx036
DO - 10.1093/jmp/jhx036
M3 - Article
C2 - 29546413
AN - SCOPUS:85044299038
VL - 43
SP - 187
EP - 210
JO - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom)
JF - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy (United Kingdom)
SN - 0360-5310
IS - 2
ER -