Imagine a pair of people, the first of whom is, by any standard you could want to pick, better than the second—not an unimaginable scenario. In such a case, most people wouldn’t have a problem saying, “If B became as smart as A, or as kind, or as pretty, or as industrious, etc., it would be a good development”; on the other hand, few would go so far as to say that it would be better for B to become A. Self-improvement is, in some literal sense, a betrayal of who-I-am-right-now, but it doesn’t offend our belief in the inherent worth of every human person. Saying that we would prefer a world in which there were two A’s rather than an A and a B, on the other hand, does.
Pinker seems to think that bioethical “dignity” talk is just a cover for “skittishness toward biomedical advances.” He’s right that the Yuck Factor is certainly a big part of it, but if “Become someone better, but don’t become someone else” is a maxim—admittedly a slippery one—that we’re willing to apply to individual people, why not apply it to the human race?
Email Subscription
Fill out the form below to be notified when takimag.com is updated.
A bioethical thought experiment for Steven Pinker
Imagine a pair of people, the first of whom is, by any standard you could want to pick, better than the second—not an unimaginable scenario. In such a case, most people … [Read More]
Posted by Helen Rittelmeyer on May 17, 2008
The Usual Suspects