Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Efforts to improve traits that are at no diagnosable risk... — Carmelics
    Home/Bioethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Efforts to improve traits that are at no diagnosable risk of deterioration are enhancements and thus medically suspect

    Bioethics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Medical necessity requires the identification of a malady in the patient
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Traits at no diagnosable risk of deterioration involve no malady
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Interventions lacking medical necessity are properly classified as enhancements
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The treatment-enhancement distinction presupposes a normative baseline of 'normal function' that is itself a contested social and historical construction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'normal function' lacks objective grounding, then 'no diagnosable risk of deterioration' cannot reliably demarcate medical from non-medical interventions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Boorse's biostatistical theory, the most rigorous attempt to naturalize this baseline, has been shown by Daniels and others to smuggle in covert normative judgments about species-typical functioning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Medicine's legitimate scope is defined by its capacity to promote human welfare and prevent suffering, not solely by the presence of diagnosable pathology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Buchanan, Brock, Daniels, and Wikler argue in 'From Chance to Choice' that confining medicine to disease-treatment arbitrarily privileges natural deficits over equally harmful socially-caused disadvantages.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If medical suspicion tracks welfare-relevance rather than diagnostic categories, interventions improving traits without pathology can fall within legitimate medical practice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Bioethics

    Related

    Boorse's biostatistical theory, the most rigorous attempt to naturalize this bas...Buchanan, Brock, Daniels, and Wikler argue in 'From Chance to Choice' that confi...If 'normal function' lacks objective grounding, then 'no diagnosable risk of det...If medical suspicion tracks welfare-relevance rather than diagnostic categories,...
    +5 moreShow less
    Interventions lacking medical necessity are properly classified as enhancementsMedical necessity requires the identification of a malady in the patientMedicine's legitimate scope is defined by its capacity to promote human welfare ...The treatment-enhancement distinction presupposes a normative baseline of 'norma...Traits at no diagnosable risk of deterioration involve no malady

    Similar

    Interventions lacking medical necessity are properly classified as enh...78%Traits at no diagnosable risk of deterioration involve no malady76%Biomedical enhancements are not less authentic than traditional method...74%When biomedical enhancements are used, the subject plays no active rol...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: enhancement
    View source passageHide passage
    Probably the most common rejoinder to the problem of prevention is to distinguish the problems to which they respond. Treatments are interventions that address the health problems created by diagnosable diseases and disabilities—“maladies” in the helpful language of Gert, Culver and Clouser (2006). Enhancements, on the other hand, are interventions aimed at healthy systems and traits. Thus, prescribing biosynthetic growth hormone to rectify a diagnosable growth hormone deficiency is legitimate t
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit