首页> 外文期刊>Ethics, policy and environment >Nature's Legacy: On Rohwer and Marris and Genomic Conservation
【24h】

Nature's Legacy: On Rohwer and Marris and Genomic Conservation

机译:大自然的遗产:论鲁尔和马里斯与基因组保护

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

In their instructive and stimulating paper, Rohwer and Marris claim that 'many conservation biologists' believe that there is a prima facie duty to preserve the genetic integrity of species. (A prima facie duty is a necessary pro tanto moral reason.) They describe three possible arguments for that belief and reject them all. They conclude that the biologists they cite are mistaken, and that there is no such duty: duties to preserve genetic integrity are merely instrumental: we ought act to preserve genetic integrity only because doing so is required by some other duty, such as the duty to preserve taxonomic biodiversity, or the duty to preserve the reproductive fitness of existing species. In permitting for instance the introgression of cattle genes into the genome of Bison bison we therefore do not necessarily fail in any respect ethically. I will criticize the paper here on three fronts.
机译:Rohwer和Marris在其具有启发性和启发性的论文中声称,“许多保护生物学家”认为,维护物种的遗传完整性负有表面责任。 (表面上的义务是必要的亲属道德理由。)他们描述了对该信念的三种可能的论点,并拒绝了所有这些论点。他们得出的结论是,他们引用的生物学家是错误的,并且没有这样的义务:维护遗传完整性的职责仅仅是工具性的:我们应该采取行动维护遗传完整性,只是因为这样做是其他职责所要求的,例如保留生物分类生物多样性,或维护现有物种生殖健康的义务。因此,在允许例如牛基因渗入野牛野牛的基因组中的过程中,我们并不一定在道德上会失败。我将在三个方面对本文进行批评。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号