How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Respect Post-Persons

E. Terrill
{"title":"How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Respect Post-Persons","authors":"E. Terrill","doi":"10.55613/jeet.v31i1.84","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Advocates of the Respect Model of moral status have expressed skepticism about the possibility that radically enhanced persons will have a higher threshold of moral status over non-radically enhanced persons. While several philosophers have already argued that advocates of the Respect Model of moral status should recognize such a possibility in a world with radically enhanced persons, I make room for a stronger claim: advocates of the Respect Model of moral status should not only recognize the possibility of higher thresholds of moral status, but in fact are committed to the normative view that radically enhanced persons should have a higher threshold of moral status over non-radically enhanced persons. This stronger claim induces both rational and self-interested worries about the sacrificeability of non-radically enhanced persons, which takes the form of the inequality of immunity problem. While this problem need not rationally worry the advocate of the Respect Model of moral status, I provide some exploratory solutions that can be implemented now to assuage future self-interested fears so that advocates of the Respect Model may learn to respect the dignity of radically enhanced persons.","PeriodicalId":157018,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55613/jeet.v31i1.84","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Advocates of the Respect Model of moral status have expressed skepticism about the possibility that radically enhanced persons will have a higher threshold of moral status over non-radically enhanced persons. While several philosophers have already argued that advocates of the Respect Model of moral status should recognize such a possibility in a world with radically enhanced persons, I make room for a stronger claim: advocates of the Respect Model of moral status should not only recognize the possibility of higher thresholds of moral status, but in fact are committed to the normative view that radically enhanced persons should have a higher threshold of moral status over non-radically enhanced persons. This stronger claim induces both rational and self-interested worries about the sacrificeability of non-radically enhanced persons, which takes the form of the inequality of immunity problem. While this problem need not rationally worry the advocate of the Respect Model of moral status, I provide some exploratory solutions that can be implemented now to assuage future self-interested fears so that advocates of the Respect Model may learn to respect the dignity of radically enhanced persons.
我是如何学会停止担忧并尊重他人的
道德地位尊重模型的倡导者对根本提升的人比非根本提升的人有更高道德地位门槛的可能性表示怀疑。虽然有几位哲学家已经提出,道德地位尊重模型的倡导者应该认识到,在一个人得到彻底提升的世界里,这种可能性是存在的,但我还是提出了一个更有力的主张:道德地位尊重模型的倡导者不仅应该认识到道德地位有更高门槛的可能性,而且实际上还应该坚持这样一种规范性观点,即从根本上提升的人应该比非从根本上提升的人有更高的道德地位门槛。这种更强烈的主张引起了对非根本增强者的牺牲性的理性和利己的担忧,这种担忧表现为豁免问题的不平等。虽然这个问题不需要理性地担心道德地位的尊重模型的倡导者,但我提供了一些探索性的解决方案,现在可以实施,以减轻未来的自利恐惧,以便尊重模型的倡导者可以学会尊重从根本上提高了的人的尊严。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信