Search results for ""Author John H. Evans""

Recent new technologies have brought the realm of science fiction to reality. The development of human-animal neuro-chimeras, which are animals with some component of a human brain, plays into society''s long-standing fascination with the crossover between humans and animals. In the same way, the development of human brain organoids-small parts of a human brain grown from harvested human cells-feeds our fear and fascination of disembodied brains. The general reaction to these technologies is shock or disgust. This book closely examines the public''s response to such new scientific advances: the questions they raise about the biological essence of personhood, the ethics of growing and mixing human-animal parts, and the fears of dystopian misuse that might arise from the development of such technologies. There is a general public belief in a foundational distinction between humans and animals, and the development of human-animal neuro-chimeras violates this belief and creates opposition

Read more less

Scientific breakthroughs have led us to a point where soon we will be able to make specific choices about the genetic makeup of our offspring. In fact, this reality has arrived - and it is only a matter of time before the technology becomes widespread. Much like past arguments about stem-cell research, the coming debate over these reproductive genetic technologies (RGTs) will be both political and, for many people, religious. In order to understand how the debate will play out in the United States, John H. Evans conducted the first in-depth study of the claims made about RGTs by religious people from across the political spectrum, and "Contested Reproduction" is the stimulating result. Some of the opinions Evans documents are familiar, but others - such as the idea that certain genetic conditions produce a 'meaningful suffering' that is, ultimately, desirable - provide a fascinating glimpse of religious reactions to cutting-edge science. Not surprisingly, Evans discovers that for many people opinion on the issue closely relates to their feelings about abortion, but he also finds a shared moral language that offers a way around the unproductive polarization of the abortion debate and other culture-war concerns. "Contested Reproduction" is a prescient, profound look into the future of a hot-button issue.

Read more less

Technology evolves at a dazzling speed, and nowhere more so than in the field of genetic engineering, where the possibility of directly changing the genes of one's children is quickly becoming a reality. The public is rightly concerned, but interestingly, they have not had much to say about the implications of recent advancements in human genetics. Playing God? asks why and explores the social forces that have led to the thinning out of public debate over human genetic engineering. John H. Evans contends that the problem lies in the structure of the debate itself. Disputes over human genetic engineering concern the means for achieving assumed ends, rather than being a healthy discussion about the ends themselves. According to Evans, this change in focus occurred as the jurisdiction over the debate shifted from scientists to bioethicists, a change which itself was caused by the rise of the bureaucratic state as the authority in such matters. The implications of this timely study are twofold. Evans not only explores how decisions about the ethics of human genetic engineering are made, but also shows how the structure of the debate has led to the technological choices we now face.

Read more less

Technology evolves at a dazzling speed, and nowhere more so than in the field of genetic engineering, where the possibility of directly changing the genes of one's children is quickly becoming a reality. The public is rightly concerned, but interestingly, they have not had much to say about the implications of recent advancements in human genetics. Playing God? asks why and explores the social forces that have led to the thinning out of public debate over human genetic engineering. John H. Evans contends that the problem lies in the structure of the debate itself. Disputes over human genetic engineering concern the means for achieving assumed ends, rather than being a healthy discussion about the ends themselves. According to Evans, this change in focus occurred as the jurisdiction over the debate shifted from scientists to bioethicists, a change which itself was caused by the rise of the bureaucratic state as the authority in such matters. The implications of this timely study are twofold. Evans not only explores how decisions about the ethics of human genetic engineering are made, but also shows how the structure of the debate has led to the technological choices we now face.

Read more less