Lewens T
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge CB2 3RH, UK.
J Med Ethics. 2009 Jun;35(6):354-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.028423.
If we assume that "enhancement" names all efforts to boost human mental and physical capacities beyond the normal upper range found in our species, then enhancement covers such a broad range of interventions that it becomes implausible to think that there is any generic ethical case to be made either for or against it. Michael Sandel has recently made such a generic case, which focuses on the importance of respecting the "giftedness" of human nature. Sandel succeeds in diagnosing an important worry we may have about the use of some enhancements by some parents, but his arguments are better understood as opposing "procrustean parenting" rather than enhancement in general.
如果我们假定“增强”涵盖了所有旨在将人类的心理和身体能力提升至超出我们这个物种正常上限范围的努力,那么增强所涵盖的干预措施范围就如此广泛,以至于认为存在支持或反对它的任何一般性伦理理由都变得难以置信。迈克尔·桑德尔最近提出了这样一个一般性理由,其重点在于尊重人性“天赋”的重要性。桑德尔成功地诊断出了我们可能对一些父母使用某些增强手段所抱有的一个重要担忧,但他的论点最好被理解为是反对“强求一致的养育方式”,而非反对一般意义上的增强。