Abstract
This paper continues an exchange on eugenics in Monash Bioethics Review between Anomaly (2018), Wilson (2019), and Veit, Anomaly, Agar, Singer, Fleischman, and Minerva (2021). The eponymous question posed by Veit et al., “Can ‘Eugenics’ be Defended?”, is multiply ambiguous and does not receive a clear answer from Veit et al themselves. Despite their stated desire to move beyond mere semantics to matters of substance, Veit et al. concentrate on several uses of the term “eugenics” that pull in opposite directions. I argue, first, that Veit et al. (2021) makes much the same error as does Anomaly (2018) in characterizing eugenics; second, that the paper misunderstands the relationship between eugenics and enhancement; and third, that it distorts the views that I expressed in my “Eugenics Undefended”.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 169-176 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Monash Bioethics Review |
Volume | 39 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Oct 2021 |