Human nature and enhancement.

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Human Enhancement
• Biotechnology

Background:

• Ethical debates on human enhancement frequently invoke the concept of human nature.
• Concerns exist that biotechnology may alter or destroy human nature.
• This alteration is feared to undermine our capacity to determine what is good.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically examine the ethical implications of altering human nature through biotechnology.
• To challenge the assumption that human nature is inherently good and should be preserved.
• To argue that appeals to human nature obscure, rather than clarify, enhancement ethics.

Main Methods:

• Philosophical analysis of ethical arguments concerning human nature and enhancement.
• Deconstruction of the presumed link between human nature and the definition of 'the good'.
• Conceptual evaluation of the role of human nature in ethical decision-making.

Main Results:

• Altering human nature is not intrinsically wrong, as human nature contains both positive and negative traits.
• Eliminating negative aspects of human nature is permissible and does not necessarily jeopardize the good.
• Human nature does not serve as the sole determinant for defining 'the good'.

Conclusions:

• Appeals to human nature in enhancement ethics are often misleading.
• Ethical considerations of human enhancement can be more effectively addressed by focusing on specific consequences rather than abstract notions of nature.
• A robust conception of the good exists independently of a fixed human nature, allowing for ethical judgment post-enhancement.