{"title":"Genetic Enhancement, Human Rights, and Regioglobal Bioethics.","authors":"Ruiping Fan","doi":"10.1093/jmp/jhae029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the cross-cultural bioethical concerns stemming from the potential use of CRISPR-Cas9 for genetic enhancement projects. It emphasizes the need to differentiate between basic and non-basic human rights when considering genetic enhancement, as recent international declarations lack this distinction. Basic rights possess a universal nature and are applicable across cultures, while non-basic rights are culturally specific and should be determined within respective regions. To illustrate this, the study explores the acceptance or rejection of non-basic rights related to genetic enhancement in two distinct cultural categories: Type-A and Type-B cultures. Type-A cultures predominantly adhere to a liberal moral framework, while Type-B cultures are rooted in Confucian morality. Additionally, the article argues for two basic rights in genetic enhancement: the right to be free from bodily harm and the right to be free from deception. These rights differ from non-basic rights and should be universally upheld in all cultures. By analyzing a hypothetical case and drawing parallels with the He Jiankui incident, the article investigates the violation of these two basic rights in each scenario, regardless of cultural context. Consequently, both cases should be unequivocally rejected in both Type-A and Type-B cultures.</p>","PeriodicalId":47377,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhae029","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article examines the cross-cultural bioethical concerns stemming from the potential use of CRISPR-Cas9 for genetic enhancement projects. It emphasizes the need to differentiate between basic and non-basic human rights when considering genetic enhancement, as recent international declarations lack this distinction. Basic rights possess a universal nature and are applicable across cultures, while non-basic rights are culturally specific and should be determined within respective regions. To illustrate this, the study explores the acceptance or rejection of non-basic rights related to genetic enhancement in two distinct cultural categories: Type-A and Type-B cultures. Type-A cultures predominantly adhere to a liberal moral framework, while Type-B cultures are rooted in Confucian morality. Additionally, the article argues for two basic rights in genetic enhancement: the right to be free from bodily harm and the right to be free from deception. These rights differ from non-basic rights and should be universally upheld in all cultures. By analyzing a hypothetical case and drawing parallels with the He Jiankui incident, the article investigates the violation of these two basic rights in each scenario, regardless of cultural context. Consequently, both cases should be unequivocally rejected in both Type-A and Type-B cultures.
本文探讨了可能使用 CRISPR-Cas9 进行基因强化项目所引发的跨文化生物伦理问题。文章强调,在考虑基因强化问题时,有必要区分基本人权和非基本人权,因为近期的国际宣言缺乏这种区分。基本权利具有普遍性,适用于各种文化,而非基本权利则具有文化特殊性,应在各地区内确定。为了说明这一点,本研究探讨了两个不同文化类别对与基因强化有关的非基本权利的接受或拒绝:A 类文化和 B 类文化。A 型文化主要遵循自由道德框架,而 B 型文化则植根于儒家道德。此外,文章还论证了基因强化中的两项基本权利:不受身体伤害的权利和不受欺骗的权利。这些权利与非基本权利不同,应在所有文化中得到普遍维护。文章通过分析一个假设的案例,并将其与贺建奎事件相比较,探讨了这两项基本权利在不同文化背景下受到侵犯的情况。因此,无论在 A 型文化还是 B 型文化中,这两种情况都应被明确拒绝。
期刊介绍:
This bimonthly publication explores the shared themes and concerns of philosophy and the medical sciences. Central issues in medical research and practice have important philosophical dimensions, for, in treating disease and promoting health, medicine involves presuppositions about human goals and values. Conversely, the concerns of philosophy often significantly relate to those of medicine, as philosophers seek to understand the nature of medical knowledge and the human condition in the modern world. In addition, recent developments in medical technology and treatment create moral problems that raise important philosophical questions. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy aims to provide an ongoing forum for the discussion of such themes and issues.