Related Experiment Videos
Persons of lesser values--moral argument and the "final solution"
1Department of Government, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
Journal of Applied Philosophy
|January 1, 1995
Summary
This paper explores the moral complexities of eugenics, arguing that widely-held values on human health and procreation can be ethically embraced without endorsing harmful historical justifications. It outlines a moral framework to avoid the slippery slope criticism often associated with genetic counseling and similar practices.
Area of Science:
- Bioethics
- Moral Philosophy
- History of Science
Background:
- The Holocaust is often viewed as an absolute moral evil.
- Perpetrators used eugenics arguments, which align with some modern values concerning human health and procreation.
- This creates a moral dilemma for those who support contemporary practices like genetic counseling.
Observation:
- The eugenics argument, a justification for atrocities, is rooted in values shared by many today.
- Concerns exist that endorsing these values could lead to a 'slippery slope' toward morally reprehensible actions.
- This highlights a perceived inconsistency in ethical frameworks.
Findings:
- A moral position can consistently uphold values related to human health and procreation.
- This ethical framework avoids the problematic 'slippery slope' often associated with eugenics.
- It provides a structure for navigating the ethical landscape of genetic technologies.
Implications:
- Provides a robust ethical framework for genetic counseling and reproductive technologies.
- Helps differentiate between beneficial applications of health values and historical abuses.
- Offers guidance for maintaining moral integrity in the face of complex bioethical challenges.