ReviewCambridge prisms. Extinction2023
Philosophy and ethics of de-extinction.
Review in Cambridge prisms. Extinction, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- De-extinction technology and its application to conservation.The Journal of heredity · 2026Review
- Molecular Paleontology Meets Drug Discovery: The Case for De-extinct Antimicrobials.ACS omega · 2025Review
- Reviving the Dire Wolf? A Case Study in Welfare Ethics, Legal Gaps, and Ontological Ambiguity.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Intergenerational justice, the impending sixth mass extinction, reproduction and advanced biotechnologies, and humanity's future.Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2025Review
- De-extinction beyond species: Restoring ecosystem functionality through large herbivore rewilding.Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2025Article
- Ancient DNA: the past for the future.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- The ethics of species extinctions.Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this essay, we explore the philosophical and ethical issues concerning de-extinction. First, we will characterize what de-extinction is. This requires clarification of the process of extinction. Second, we consider whether de-extinction is even possible. There are a variety of arguments involving the nature of species that purport to show that once they have disappeared they cannot be resurrected. Third, we examine whether de-extinction is morally permissible. There are arguments that suggest we are obligated to do it based on restorative justice and biodiversity conservation. There are other arguments that conclude we are not permitted to do so based on considerations of animal welfare, hubris and the allocation of conservation resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.