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
    Real freedom is increased when a child has access to a wi... — Carmelics
    Home/Bioethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Prospective parents may permissibly engineer a child to be hearing because doing so increases the child's real freedom.

    Real freedom is increased when a child has access to a wider range of life plans.

    BioethicsRights & Liberty
    ?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.

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

    Topics

    BioethicsRights & Liberty

    Related

    Hearing is a trait linked to a wider range of life plans.Increasing a child's real freedom is a permissible parental aim in reprogenetic ...Prospective parents may permissibly engineer a child to be hearing because doing...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Bioethics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Extensive freedom is required for individuals to develop their faculti...78%Real freedom consists in being able to pursue combinations of function...78%Individual freedom is necessary for the self-development of individual...77%Increasing a child's real freedom is a permissible parental aim in rep...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: eugenics
    View source passageHide passage
    Davis (2010) and Agar (2004) both use deafness as a case for clarification, as such a case calls attention to the contentious nature of these decisions. They both take hearing to be a core human capacity, or a trait that is necessary for a wide variety of life plans. Hence, they argue, engineering a child to be deaf will limit that child’s future options. This is not, of course, to say that deaf individuals cannot live rewarding lives in which they flourish. Indeed, Agar recognizes that in some

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective