Daoism and Liberal Eugenics: Response to Chai

Authors

  • Michael CAMPBELL 香港中文大學 (The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HONG KONG)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.141623

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English

In this paper, I respond to David Chai’s attempt to buttress Jürgen Habermas’s critique of genetic enhancement with Daoist metaphysics. I argue that this attempt is unsuccessful because Habermas’s position begins with the conviction that ethical prescriptions cannot be derived from metaphysical truths. I then consider whether Daoist metaphysics on its own might provide grounds for rejecting enhancement. I suggest not. To support this, I present a dilemma for Daoist critiques of enhancement: either Daoism rules out both therapy and enhancement, in which case it is too demanding, or it rules out neither therapy nor enhancement, in which case it is too permissive.

DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 70 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2016-01-01

How to Cite

CAMPBELL, M. (2016). Daoism and Liberal Eugenics: Response to Chai. International Journal of Chinese &Amp; Comparative Philosophy of Medicine, 14(2), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.141623

Issue

Vol. 14 No. 2 (2016)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2016 International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The CC BY-NC 4.0 license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and not used for commercial purposes. Copyright on any article is retained by the author(s) and the publisher(s).