From “Therapy Versus Enhancement” to Proportionality

Recognising the limitations of a framework that allows therapyTherapy and prohibits enhancementEnhancement based on intention, this chapter questions whether enhancement (understood as an intervention to improve a human trait above the average level in a population) is intrinsically bad. An analysis of the object, intentions, and circumstances of enhancement was done to verify that. The intentions can be divided into a proximate end (improvement) and some remote deeper intentions (e.g., to cure or prevent diseases, to be superior to others, to be fit for a specific activity, etc.). The circumstances surrounding enhancements are summarised as the risk of discrimination, social rejection of human vulnerabilityVulnerability, inequality of access, loss of diversity, and the lack of liberty. However, if all the above were solved, at least to a satisfactory level, the question of whether or not enhancement is inherently wrong remains. It is necessary to analyse the object of enhancementEnhancement, which may be neutral, good, or bad for the person and the species. This depends on the specific intervention and the means involved. The means must be always legitimate (good or neutral) and adequate for the specific case. Finally, this chapter initiates a reflection on a new framework that is comprised of the ethical assessment of the object, intentions, and circumstances of enhancementsEnhancement and calls for the principle of proportionalityProportionality to guide the selection among legitimate means.