Classifying an intervention by its target rather than its outcome allows any enhancement to be reframed as treatment by identifying a pre-existing vulnerability it addresses (the 'bootstrapping' objection, Juengst 1997).

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Juengst (1997)(as a philosophical source on enhancement ethics): Eric Juengst is a bioethicist who wrote influential work on the ethics of genetic enhancement; this citation refers to his 1997 publication where he discussed problems with how we distinguish between treating disease and enhancing normal function.
Vulnerability(in bioethics and medical philosophy): A weakness, susceptibility, or predisposition to something harmful—for example, a genetic tendency toward heart disease.
bootstrapping objection(Raised against constructivist accounts of general normativity, specifically those of Korsgaard and Street.): The objection that a constructivist account of normativity is circular because it attempts to justify the normativity of reasons using a method that already assumes the normativity of reasons.
enhancement(Includes positive genetic engineering; regarded as medically suspect because it lacks a malady-based justification)

Based on where you are in your exploration