You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Is Radical Enhancement of the Human Species "Ethically" Justified?
Pages 4 (1004 words)
Name: Instructor: Course: Date: Is radical enhancement of the human species is "ethically" justified? Using biochemical technology to enhance the performance of human species beyond their existing capabilities has evoked different controversial views from different thinkers.
To discuss on this topic, this essay shall compare and contrast two texts; ‘Humanity’s end’ by Nicholas Agar and ‘Better than human’ by Allen Buchanan. Arguments for this paper get based on the works of the two authors who get to provide a little more insight into bioethics. In ‘humanity’s end’, Agar argues against radical enhancement of the human species. He explains the destructive consequences that may arise out of radical enhancement of the human species. In his book, Agar argues against the ideas proposed by four radical enhancement thinkers (Agar 11). He explains that the results of radical advancement may have more negative outcomes than positives proposed by the four thinkers. Agar argues that some radical enhancements, especially germline engineering, may end the human species. In ‘better than human’ Allen Buchanan argues for radical enhancement. He proposes that human beings should become open to the idea of getting better than they already are since the human body design does contain flaws. He argues that radical enhancements could make the human species smarter, stronger, have more stamina, live longer and have better memories. Buchanan argues that people reject biomedical enhancements due to a poor understanding, misleading information or false assumptions (Buchanan 19). ...
Not exactly what you need?