Savulescu promotes eugenics in MA joining Walter Fernald, and Everett Flood, early advocates of sterilizing defective persons. The Oxford ethicist wants to "test for certain genes that predict aggressive behavior, which would potentially alter the criminal justice system."
An ethicist (are there licenses to practice ethics?) wants to change the Constitution without even an executive order. Like the Nazi doctors he divides "human beings into low and high risks, [. . .] pointing to potential societal benefits." At the Nuremberg trials the doctor who used human subjects argued the benefit to society outweighed harm to individuals. The same argument is often heard among medical researchers today. Focusing on “the best chance of the best life.” he sounds like Peter Singer another "ethicist." Singer says parents of severely disabled babies should be allowed to kill their babies within the first six months in order to increase happiness in the world. Julian Savulescu wants “to select those embryos [. . .] that are healthy, [. . .] who have [a] lower risk of violent aggression[.]”
He argues "both potential victims and criminals would be better off." without providing details of what he means by good (better off). “When the cost to you is small and the benefit to somebody else is large, you ought to perform that action.” See defense argument (above) at Nuremberg trials.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/10/21/oxford-professor-science-morality/
Oxford Professor Talks Science and Moral Behavior
By MAXWELL J. SIMON, CONTRIBUTING WRITER
Harvard Crimson
October 21, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment