Loading...
Place-Based Thoughtfulness and Decision-Making in Gene Editing and Genetic Selection
Crowden, Andrew Gildersleeve, Matthew
Crowden, Andrew
Gildersleeve, Matthew
Abstract
Renown Oxford philosopher Derek Parfit became obsessed with the superiority of external reasons for action. At gatherings he would implausibly insist that moral philosopher Bernard Williams, who disagreed with Parfit on external reasons, did not actually have a concept of a normative reason (Edmonds Citation2023, 263). The authors of Philosophy, Reasons and Reproduction: Gene Editing and Genetic Selection may or may not agree with Parfit on this point (McMahan and Savulescu Citation2024). In their paper the authors certainly evidence the pervasive spirit of Parfit’s obsession with consequential normative reasons. The authors provide some interesting thought experiments and cleverly apply Parfit’s early consequentialist claims about reasons for causing people to exist, or not, to gene editing and genetic selection. In the end they argue that a more general use of gene-editing is preferred over an embryo selection process. They claim that such a view is better both impersonally and in person-affecting terms. The authors claims are technically sound. For us, they are morally inconclusive. A thoughtful consideration of place provides a more realistic and inclusive focus. Such inclusive reasoning is most efficient when it is not articulated as a solely impartialist analysis. A level of partiality is also important. Effective reasoning about serious matters must be enacted with a broader view and overt acknowledgement of what it means to be human. This requires a reflection on life in all its diverse forms. It is Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge, cultural expression and human connection to self, others and place that create meaningful human lives that enable effective and thoughtful moral reasoning, deliberation, and decision-making. When impartialist critical reasoning is abstracted and disconnected from the aforementioned realities, then moral reasoning and deliberation about, if and when, gene editing should be preferred over embryo selection becomes reductive and potentially meaningless.
Keywords
Date
2024
Type
Article
Journal
American Journal of Bioethics
Book
Volume
24
Issue
8
Page Range
53-55
Article Number
ACU Department
School of Arts and Humanities
Collections
Relation URI
Event URL
Open Access Status
Gold open access
License
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International)
File Access
Notes
This article refers to: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15265161.2023.2250288
© 2024 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & francis Group, llc.
This is an open Access article distributed under the terms of the creative commons Attribution-noncommercial-noDerivatives license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed,or built upon in any way. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with theirconsent.