A Companion to the Philosophy of Technology

3. Identity-preserving Genetic Interventions

Except perhaps in exceptional cases, genetic pharmacology and gene therapy will be identity-preserving. Therefore, such interventions usually benefit their recipients. For this reason, many will consider them less controversial technologies, at least as long as they are considered sufficiently safe, do not pass on genetic modifications to future generations, and aim only to treat disease.

One worry that some nevertheless have about genetic pharmacology and gene therapy is that they are a slippery slope toward less acceptable forms of genetic intervention, say, memory or intelligence enhancements. This raises two separate but related issues. One is how strong this slippery-slope argument is as a general argument against genetic pharmacology and gene therapy. Perhaps some time in the future (brain) surgery may also be used to enhance memory or intelligence, but it is doubtful if this is a good reason to ban surgery (Holtug 1993: 417).

The other issue is what sort of genetic interventions should be considered morally impermissible and so possible undesirable end-results of a slippery slope. Some have drawn a distinction between the treatment of disease, on the one hand, and enhancements, on the other, where a disease may be defined as a departure from species-typical normal functioning. It is then claimed that only the former interventions are permissible. Nevertheless, such a claim would rule out at least some interventions that may seem ...