Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30251030›Full record

ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2019

Moral enhancement and the good life.

Hazem Zohny

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Human Enhancement: A Conceptual Scoping Review.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2026
    Article
  2. Well-being and enhancement: reassessing the welfarist account.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Hazem ZohnyThe Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, The University of Oxford, Suite 8, Littlegate House, 16-17 St Ebbe St, Oxford, OX11PT, UK. hazem.zohny@philosophy.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7734-2186

Funding

Wellcome Trust 100705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One approach to defining enhancement is in the form of bodily or mental changes that tend to improve a person's well-being. Such a "welfarist account", however, seems to conflict with moral enhancement: consider an intervention that improves someone's moral motives but which ultimately diminishes their well-being. According to the welfarist account, this would not be an instance of enhancement-in fact, as I argue, it would count as a disability. This seems to pose a serious limitation for the account. Here, I elaborate on this limitation and argue that, despite it, there is a crucial role for such a welfarist account to play in our practical deliberations about moral enhancement. I do this by exploring four scenarios where a person's motives are improved at the cost of their well-being. A framework emerges from these scenarios which can clarify disagreements about moral enhancement and help sharpen arguments for and against it.

Indexed as

MoralsPhilosophy, MedicalQuality of LifeBiomedical EnhancementHumansEnhancementEthicsWell-being

Identifiers

PMID30251030
PMCPMC6499734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.