Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 4, 2026

A Step Beyond BRET: Fluorescence by Unbound Excitation from Luminescence (FUEL)
Published on: May 23, 2014
The turn for ultimate harm: a reply to Fenton
Ingmar Persson1, Julian Savulescu
1The Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, 16-17 St Ebbes Street, Oxford, UK.
Abstract:
Elizabeth Fenton has criticised an earlier article by the authors in which the claim was made that, by providing humankind with means of causing its destruction, the advance of science and technology has put it in a perilous condition that might take the development of genetic or biomedical techniques of moral enhancement to get out of. The development of these techniques would, however, require further scientific advances, thus forcing humanity deeper into the danger zone created by modern science. Fenton argues that the benefits of scientific advances are undervalued. The authors believe that the argument rather relies upon attaching a special weight to even very slight risks of major catastrophes, and attempt to vindicate this weighting.
Related Concept Videos
Torts III
Quasi-intentional torts in healthcare involve acts where intent is not directed to harm an individual but results in harm due to careless or reckless speech.
Torts II
Social Traps
Torts I
Intentional...
Framing Effects
Personal Choice and Fate Attributions

