70 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
'I should have been a security consultant': The Good Lives Model and residential burglars
Understanding of the potential ârewardsâ that residential burglars gain through their offences has largely been confined to monetary return, thus overlooking the possibility that offenders obtain other âgoodsâ from their criminal activities. By illustrating how burglars could be attending to various lifestyle deficits through crime, the article reveals indicators for case management, rehabilitation and desistance. The Good Lives Model (GLM) is employed as a framework to explore the âprimary human goodsâ attained through residential burglary. The article concludes with suggestions to encourage desistance by challenging the authenticity of the goods burglars seek to fulfil or remedy through criminal behaviour
The ethical desirability of moral bioenhancement: A review of reasons
Background: The debate on the ethical aspects of moral bioenhancement focuses on the desirability of using biomedical as opposed to traditional means to achieve moral betterment. The aim of this paper is to systematically review the ethical reasons presented in the literature for and against moral bioenhancement. Discussion: A review was performed and resulted in the inclusion of 85 articles. We classified the arguments used in those articles in the following six clusters: (1) why we (don't) need moral bioenhancement, (2) it will (not) be possible to reach consensus on what moral bioenhancement should involve, (3) the feasibility of moral bioenhancement and the status of current scientific research, (4) means and processes of arriving at moral improvement matter ethically, (5) arguments related to the freedom, identity and autonomy of the individual, and (6) arguments related to social/group effects and dynamics. We discuss each argument separately, and assess the debate as a whole. First, there is little discussion on what distinguishes moral bioenhancement from treatment of pathological deficiencies in morality. Furthermore, remarkably little attention has been paid so far to the safety, risks and side-effects of moral enhancement, including the risk of identity changes. Finally, many authors overestimate the scientific as well as the practical feasibility of the interventions they discuss, rendering the debate too speculative. Summary: Based on our discussion of the arguments used in the debate on moral enhancement, and our assessment of this debate, we advocate a shift in focus. Instead of speculating about non-realistic hypothetical scenarios such as the genetic engineering of morality, or morally enhancing 'the whole of humanity', we call for a more focused debate on realistic options of biomedical treatment of moral pathologies and the concrete moral questions these treatments raise
- âŠ