Introduction to Happiness

1
Introduction to Happiness

• Dan Turton
• PHIL106 - 2008

2
My Goal Today

• Get you to believe two things
• 1) Happiness is real
• 2) Happiness is good

3
Are you Happy?

• A simple and a complicated question
• How we go about answering it depends on what we
  take happiness to mean
• Or, it depends on how the question is asked

4
How Can I Find Out if You Are Happy?

• How are you feeling right now (from 1 to 7)?
• 1 very bad, 4 OK, 7 very good
• All things considered, how happy are you these
  days (from 1 to 7)?
• 1 very unhappy, 4 OK, 7 very happy
• On the whole, how good do you think your life is
  (from 1 to 7)?
• 1 very bad, 4 OK, 7 very good

5
How Can You Find Out if You Are Happy? (So You
Can Answer)

• How are you feeling right now (from 1 to 7)?
• Introspection
• All things considered, how happy are you these
  days (from 1 to 7)?
• Introspection, comparative judgement
• On the whole, how good do you think your life is
  (from 1 to 7)?
• Introspection, comparative judgement, relative to
  conception of the good life

6
Three Levels of Happiness

• Nettle (in the course readings) groups happiness
  into three different types or levels

7
Level One Happiness Feeling Happy in the Moment

• How are you feeling right now?
• Introspection
• Level One Happiness (Nettle)
• Mood
• Pleasure
• Joy
• Absence of pain and suffering (negative feelings)
• Fear, Anger, Sadness, Disgust, Pain

8
Level One Happiness Feeling Happy in the Moment

• Is there really such a thing?
• How good are we at getting it right?
• Introspection
• Smiling.
• Brain scans
• How good is it to have?

9
Level Two Happiness Judging Your Happiness

• All things considered, how happy are you these
  days?
• Introspection, comparative judgement
• Level Two Happiness (Nettle)
• Total net Level One happiness
• Well-being
• Satisfaction
• Judgement about feelings
• Can be distorted by biased judgements

10
Level Two Happiness Judging Your Happiness

• Is there really such a thing?
• How good are we at getting it right?
• Appraisal biases
• Aspirational biases
• How good is it to have?

11
Level Three Happiness Thinking You Have a Good
Life

• On the whole, how good do you think your life is?
• Introspection, comparative judgement, relative to
  conception of the good life
• Level Three Happiness (Nettle)
• Eudaimonia
• Fulfilling potential
• Quality of life
• Doesnt always require Level 1 or 2 happiness

12
Level Three Happiness Thinking You Have a Good
Life

• Is there really such a thing?
• Subjectively yes
• Objectively interesting question
• How good are we at getting it right?
• How good is it to have?

13
Happiness Continuum

• Level 1
• Momentary feelings
• Mood
• Pleasure or joy
• Not suffering

• Level 2
• Judgements about feelings
• Net level 1 happiness
• Well-being
• satisfaction

• Level 3
• Holistic evaluation of value of life
• Flourishing
• Neednt include happiness

More emotional, sensual, and reliable
More cognitive, moral, and easily biased
14
Next Two Weeks

• Level One Two Happiness, enjoying and being
  satisfied with your life, is what we will be
  mainly discussing over the next 2 weeks
• Happiness and Advertising
• Happiness and Bioethics

15
Happiness Advertising 1

• Dan Turton

16
Happiness Continuum

• Level 1
• Momentary feelings
• Mood
• Pleasure or joy
• Not suffering

• Level 2
• Judgements about feelings
• Net level 1 happiness
• Well-being
• satisfaction

• Level 3
• Holistic evaluation of value of life
• Flourishing
• Neednt include happiness

More emotional, sensual, and reliable
More cognitive, moral, and easily biased
17
Today

• Start addressing the question
• Is advertising immoral?
• An explanation of advertising
• A defense of advertising
• Setting up some of the moral issues

18
Advertising is

• Communication from a specific source that intends
  to inform and influence the audience so that they
  believe something and/or behave in a certain way
• It is usually
• Persuading people to purchase a brand/product
• Paid for
• Using mass media

19
Advertising might also be

• Rosser Reeves
• Manager of a successful advertising company
• While holding up two coins
• Making you think that this quarter is more
  valuable than that one

20
The Role of Advertising

• Advertising supports marketing and business
  function.
• A modern business model
• Perform consumer research
• Develop new product based on research
• Advertise product
• Sell product
• Importantly, both the business and the consumers
  are thought to benefit from this

21
The Benefits of Advertising

• Advertising helps consumers decide what to buy
• Informs about the existence of new products
• Informs about new uses for existing products
• Informs about differences between products
• Advertising provides incentives to
• Make differentiated products, and
• Innovative products

22
The Benefits of Advertising 2

• Advertising is entertainment
• Many ads are
• Funny
• Interesting
• Artistic
• Appealing in other ways

23
The Benefits of Advertising 3

• Advertising is good for the economy
• It is a huge industry
• It employs a lot of people
• It stimulates economic growth by connecting more
  of consumers needs and wants with solutions
• Economic growth is good
• Means you can get more things you want

24
The Benefits of Advertising 3

• Advertising is good for the economy
• It is a huge industry
• It employs a lot of people
• It stimulates economic growth by connecting more
  of consumers needs and wants with solutions
• Economic growth is good
• Means you can get more things you want

25
The Benefits of Advertising 4

• Winston Churchill
• Advertising nourishes the consuming power of
  men. It creates wants for a better standard of
  living It spurs individual exertion and greater
  production.
• Advertising improves our well-being

26
So, Whats Wrong with Advertising?

• Apparently, advertising deceives people into
  buying things that they dont really need
• Apparently, advertising lies, deceives and
  misleads
• Apparently, advertising makes people think they
  need things that they shouldnt even want

27
Advertising Doesnt Lie

• Reasons why advertisers dont lie
• Misleading ads are reported and removed from
  circulation
• ASA Truthful Presentation - Advertisements
  should not contain any statement or visual
  presentation or create an overall impression
  which directly or by implication, omission,
  ambiguity or exaggerated claim is misleading or
  deceptive, is likely to deceive or mislead the
  consumer, makes false and misleading
  representation, abuses the trust of the consumer
  or exploits his/her lack of experience or
  knowledge. (Obvious hyperbole, identifiable as
  such, is not considered to be misleading).

28
Advertising Doesnt Lie

• Reasons why advertisers dont lie
• Misleading ads are reported and removed from
  circulation
• Lies about product quality are soon discovered,
  making the lying company go out of business
• Really important product categories have extra
  regulations to prevent lying
• Advertisers dont want to tarnish the reputation
  of advertising generally

29
Advertising Doesnt Make Us Buy Things We Dont
Need

• Advertising never forces anyone to do anything
• Advertising does influence our purchase decisions
  (at least it intends to)
• But what is wrong with that?
• Advertising cant encourage you to want something
  you really dont need
• Advertising can only help you fulfill wants and
  needs you already have

30
Should Advertising be Allowed to Help Us Fulfill
Our Wants?

• Should we stop people from helping others to
  fulfill their wants?
• Depends on the wants
• Some things we want are bad for others
• Some things we want are bad for ourselves

31
Should Advertising Help Us Fulfill Our Wants?

• Sure, people shouldnt be encouraged to harm
  others but
• Who should decide what we should and shouldnt
  want (for our own good)?
• What is better, freedom or having the government
  protect us from our own wants?
• Why shouldnt I be able to do whatever I want
  with my money (without hurting others)?
• Consumer Sovereignty Surely I have that right!
• Where do we draw the line?

32
Summary

• Advertising is good because
• It helps consumers decide what to buy
• It provides incentives for innovation
• At least some of it is entertaining
• Its good for the economy
• It allows us to improve our lives (as we see fit)
  by helping us to satisfy our wants and needs
• Busting the myths about advertising
• Advertising does not lie or deceive
• Advertising cannot make people buy things they
  dont want

33
Happiness Advertising 2 (Part 1)

• Dan Turton

34
Last Time

• Advertising is good because
• It helps consumers decide what to buy
• It provides incentives for innovation
• At least some of it is entertaining
• Its good for the economy
• It allows us to improve our lives (as we see fit)
  by helping us to satisfy our wants and needs
• Busting the myths about advertising
• Advertising does not lie or deceive
• Advertising cannot make people buy things they
  dont want

35
Today

• Clive Hamilton's argument that advertising is
  immoral and should be banned
• The advertisers argument about how advertising
  helps us is flawed
• Advertising also makes us unhappy (Next time)

36
Problem Margin of Discontent

• Gap between what we have and what we want
• Hamilton mentions two solutions
• Economic growth solution
• People satisfy their wants by increasing their
  possessions, thus becoming happier
• Sages solution
• Give up wanting

37
Neo-Liberal Argument(Roughly According to
Hamilton)

• Reducing the margin of discontent makes people
  happier
• Economic growth helps consumers to reduce their
  margin of discontent
• Advertising encourages economic growth
• Advertising helps consumers to make better
  decisions about how to reduce the margin of
  discontent
• c) Therefore, advertising helps make people
  happier

38
Hamiltons Refutation of the Neo-Liberal Argument

• More (economic growth) does not make us
  happier
• Therefore, either P1 or P2 is false
• Advertising does not help consumers to make
  better decisions about how to reduce the margin
  of discontent
• Therefore, P4 is false

39
Does Make Us Happy?

• Reducing the margin of discontent makes people
  happier
• Economic growth helps consumers to reduce their
  margin of discontent
• If 1. and 2. are both true then why have we
  gotten richer but not happier?
• Evidence?

40
(No Transcript)
41
Materialism Doesnt Pay
Very High
42
Adaptation

• Lottery winners return to pretty much the same
  level of happiness after 1 year
• The more we have
• The more we want and
• The more we think we need
• Evidence?

43
So, Does Make Us Happy?

• So, unless you are materialistic, more makes
  very little difference to our happiness much
  less than
• A rewarding job
• A loving relationship
• Many more things
• But materialistic people seem to have a pretty
  strange idea of happiness
• Having said all this who would not want to win
  lotto?

44
Possible Neo-Liberal Response(Consumer
Sovereignty)

• Remember Consumer Sovereignty?
• Regardless of happiness, we have a right to do
  what we want with our money
• Economic growth gives people more freedom to
  choose whatever they wish to do with their lives
  and their money
• Without advertising consumers would find it very
  difficult to exercise this freedom

45
Hamilton Fights Back

• Advertisers claim to be helping consumers to
  freely choose how to best satisfy their needs and
  wants but this is false!
• Consumers do not freely choose between products
  because advertising manipulates our preferences
  (Consumer Sovereignty is a myth)
• More choice doesnt help us satisfy our needs and
  wants
• Therefore, P4 is false

46
Consumer Sovereignty is a Myth!

• Consumers do not freely choose between products
  because advertising manipulates our preferences
• Our preferences are formed inside, not outside,
  of the marketplace
• Indeed, consumers values, goals and personal
  identities are all formed inside the marketplace!
• Evidence?

47
The Abundance of Real Choice is a Myth

• The abundance of choices advertising provides are
  limited to meaningless choices between variations
  of things that we didnt need in the first place
• Most advertising, unfortunately, is devoted to
  an attempt to build up irrational preferences
  for certain brands to persuade consumers to
  buy Bumpo rather than Bango Prof. Boulding
• Evidence?

48
(No Transcript)
49
Coke vs. Pepsi
50
How Well Did Hamilton Fight Back?

• Advertisers claim to be helping consumers to
  freely choose how to best satisfy their needs and
  wants
• Hamilton claims that
• Advertising coerces consumers into satisfying the
  greedy financial wants of businesses, not their
  own wants or needs
• Advertising doesnt provide more real choice, so
  it doesnt help consumers choose what they really
  want

51
Neo-Liberal Argument(Roughly According to
Hamilton)

• Reducing the margin of discontent makes people
  happier
• Economic growth helps consumers to reduce their
  margin of discontent
• Advertising encourages economic growth
• Advertising helps consumers to make better
  decisions about how to reduce the margin of
  discontent
• c) Therefore, advertising helps make people
  happier

52
Summary Is Advertising Immoral?

• Advertisers would say they help everyone by
• Helping us close the margin of discontent
• Raising the standard of living
• Helping us to exercise our consumer sovereignty
  and our personal choices about how to live
• Hamilton says that these claims are false

53
Next Week

• Happiness and Advertising 2 (Part 2)
• Hamiltons argument that advertising makes us
  unhappy
• Happiness and Bioethics
• What exactly should we be allowed to do to make
  our children happy?

54
Happiness Advertising 2 (Part 2)

• PHIL 106 2008
• Dan Turton

55
Today

• Clive Hamilton's argument that advertising is
  immoral and should be banned
• Advertising also makes us unhappy
• Then intro to science behind happiness Biotech

56
Hamiltons Argument that Advertising Makes Us
Unhappy

• The margin of discontent is a source of
  unhappiness
• Advertising perpetuates the margin of discontent
  by making us feel dissatisfied with our lives
• Therefore, advertising encourages us to be
  unhappy and dissatisfied with our lives
• Therefore, advertising is immoral and should be
  banned

57
Does Advertising Make Us Dissatisfied?

• Advertisers and their critics both agree that
  advertising influences consumers
• But, to what extent does it do it? And,
• How does it do it?

58
How Much Does Advertising Influence Us?

• Advertising companies are in the funny position
  of
• Having to tell their clients that they can
  influence consumers very strongly. While,
• Having to tell consumer rights groups that they
  have very little influence on consumers
• Anyone who thinks that advertising doesnt affect
  them is wrong

59
Does Advertising Make Us Dissatisfied?

• Remember Winston Churchills quote
• He thought advertising was good because it made
  people strive for a higher standard of living
  but how did it do that?
• Maybe by making everyone feel dissatisfied with
  what they have at the moment by showing them
  something better
• Never more so than with our prime biological
  motivators (for getting a good mate/s)
• Status for men (or more directly just getting
  women).
• Beauty (sexiness) for women.
• Real beauty for women.

60
Brand vs. Company Integrity

• Crazy that some companies/brands advertise in a
  much more moral manner than others. right?
• Wrong (In this case anyway) !

61
Does Advertising Really Make Us Dissatisfied?

• Advertising either helps us solve our existing
  dissatisfactions, or
• Advertising constantly provides reasons to be
  dissatisfied and then helps us momentarily
  solve them and then tries to make us
  dissatisfied again!
• Hamilton thinks its the second option here

62
Summary Is Advertising Immoral?

• Advertisers would say they help everyone by
• Helping us close the margin of discontent
• Raising the standard of living
• Helping us to exercise our consumer sovereignty
  and our personal choices about how to live
• Hamilton says that advertising is immoral
  because
• It doesnt make us happier like they claim it
  does, and
• It coerces us into a constant state of
  dissatisfaction

63
Find Out More

• The perils of consumerism and what to do about
  it
• http//www.storyofstuff.com/
• See what the anti-advertising community is up to
  (and trying to sell to you)
• http//www.adbusters.org/home/
• Dont worry though! Find out how advertising is
  self-regulated in New Zealand
• http//www.asa.co.nz/

64
Do More

• Let the government know what you think about how
  advertising is regulated
• tmallard_at_ministers.govt.nz
• TEL [phone]
• Office of Trevor Mallard, Parliament
  Buildings,Wellington

65
Happiness and Biotechnology 1

• PHIL 106 2008
• Dan Turton

66
Teaser Questions

• If you had children, what would you want their
  lives to be like?
• What would you be willing to do to try and secure
  happiness for your children?

67
Rest of Today

• The science behind
• IVF In Vitro Fertilisation
• PGD Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis
• GE Genetic Engineering
• DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid
• Happiness

68
IVF

• In vitro Fertilisation.
• About 10 eggs extracted
• Mixed with sperm
• Cultivated for 3 days
• Put on ice
• Embryos have about 25 chance
• Either 1, 2, or 3 embryos inserted at a time
  until successful pregnancy achieved
• Thought to be pretty safe for child and mother
• Caused moral debate in 1970s

69
PGD - Explained

• Pre-implantation Genetic Diagnosis.
• During IVF, after 3 days
• 1 of the 8 cells removed
• Genetic tests are run on the DNA in the cell
• The tests commonly look for chromosomal
  abnormalities that are markers for various
  diseases

70
Uses for PGD

• Current uses of PGD - mainly therapeutic
• Nearly 1000 heritable diseases
• Down Syndrome, Huntingtons Disease etc
• Disease is sometimes selected for!
• E.g. Deafness
• Family balancing
• Possible future uses of PGD - enhancement
• Smarter, stronger, taller even happier

71
GE

• Germline Genetic Engineering.
• DNA changes that can be passed on to future
  generations
• During IVF, just after egg is fertilised and
  before cell division
• Hormone or virus or artificial chromosome added
  which changes the DNA in all future cells
• Potential uses of GE designer babies

72
DNA

• Deoxyribonucleic acid
• Human Genome Project
• Complete knowledge of the DNA that encodes human
  life achieved in 2003

73
Genetics

• Genes have a big role to play in our phenotypes
  (measurable traits)
• Genes are inherited from parents
• Developmental instructions (what to do given
  certain environmental cues)

74
Fallacy Genetic Determinism

• Genes dont dictate phenotype
• (Genes never 100 guarantee that the organism
  will develop to exhibit one particular trait)
• Interactionism
• Genes always interact with the environment to
  create the phenotype
• Do our genes guarantee that we will never have a
  trunk?

75
Science and Happiness

• Happiness is a biological reality
• Any state of mind is a biological state of mind
• Certain neurotransmitters have been implicated as
  potential components of happiness
• Remember the brain scans

76
Happiness Set Point

• Are some of your friends generally happier or
  sadder than you?
• Emerging consensus that each person has a
  happiness set point, with moods that fluctuate
  around it

Happiness
Time
77
Genetics and Happiness

• General consensus that 50 of the happiness set
  point is determined by our genes
• How happy (on average) we are likely to be
  depends on the interaction of our genes and the
  environment
• and each contributes a similar amount to our
  happiness set point

78
Genetics and Happiness

• How do they work it out?
• More detail in reading (see Sobers 4 steps)
• Twin studies
• Longitudinal tests for causal relationships
  between specific genes and the likelihood of
  certain traits appearing under certain
  environmental conditions
• If/when this can be done for happiness, then we
  can use PGD to screen for babies that are more
  likely to be happy

79
Summary

• Average Level 2 Happiness seems to be 50
  genetic.
• If we can isolate the genes doing the work here,
  then
• IVF, PGD and GE might be used to choose embryos
  with genes that make it more likely to have a
  higher happiness set point under normal
  conditions
• Imagine its possible Should we do it??

80
Next Time

• Michael Sandels argument for why we shouldnt
  enhance our children in this way

81
Happiness and Biotechnology 2

• Dan Turton

82
Last Time

• How we might be able to genetically screen IVF
  embryos (and or GE them) to be more likely to
  become happy people

Happiness
Time
83
Today

• Michael Sandels argument
• PGD/GE of children for enhancement purposes is
  morally wrong

84
Today Sandels Article

• A weaker objection that Sandel rules out
• The ethic of giftedness
• Moulding and beholding
• Where to draw the line

85
A Weaker Objection to Enhancement

• It allows parents to usurp the autonomy of the
  child they design
• Children dont have autonomy over their genes, or
  much of their early development
• Complete usurpation of a childs autonomy implies
  genetic determinism
• PGD (without GE) doesnt usurp anyones autonomy
  as such

86
The Ethic of Giftedness

• To appreciate children as gifts is to accept
  them as they come, not as objects of our design,
  or products of our will, or instruments of our
  ambition
• Parental love should not be contingent on the
  attributes of the child
• They should be open to the unbidden
• Not the same for friend/spouse choice
• Which is why being a parent is so special

87
The Problem with Enhancing

• The deepest moral objection to enhancement lies
  less in the perfection it seeks than in the human
  disposition it expresses and promotes.
• These kinds of enhancement encourage hubris in
  parents, making them less sympathetic and open to
  their children
• Disfigures the ideal? relation between parent
  and child

88
Moulding and Beholding

• How we should best treat children as valuable
  gifts?
• We need to find the right balance between
• Moulding and beholding, or
• Transforming love and accepting love

89
Moulding/Transforming Love

• Bad moulding
• Do not enhance your child beyond his or her
  natural capacities because this will degrade the
  parent-child relationship and entrench attitudes
  at odds with the norm of unconditional love
• Good moulding
• Transform your child if they are ill or diseased
  because healing a sick or injured child permits
  his or her natural capacities to flourish
  (without overriding them)

90
Healing vs. Enhancing

• Medicine is OK because it has the goal of
  restoring normal natural human functions
• But both healing and enhancing have the same
  purpose to maximise the childs chances of
  success in life
• No, the purpose of healing is to restore health
  health being the target state, a good in itself
• Health (like being morally good) is one of the
  fundamental elements required for human
  flourishing
• Health can be improved or worsened but it cannot
  be maximised

91
Beholding/Accepting Love

• Bad beholding
• Do not be too accepting
• Do not fail to cultivate (help them discover
  and develop their talents and gifts) your
  children because you have a duty to promote
  your childs excellence.
• Good beholding
• Love them for who they are and who they have the
  natural potential to be

92
Where is the line?

• Too Beholding
• Never or rarely pushing or encouraging your child
  to grow or learn

• Just Right
• Healing injury and illness
• Using PGD to avoid diseases
• Providing good education

• Too Molding
• Using PGD and/or GE to enhance
• Hyper-parenting
• Eugenics

Transforming love, without accepting love,
badgers and finally rejects.
Accepting love, without transforming love,
slides into indulgence and finally neglects.
93
Closer Look at Sandels Argument

• Note the purpose of being a good parent is to
  allow and encourage your children to flourish
  (fulfill their natural potential)
• What is it for a human to flourish?
• What is different about providing good education
  and nutrition to a child and using PGD to
  increase the chance of having a happy child?
• If it was discovered that vitamin H made us
  happier, would you give some to your child?
• Is PGD for happiness like hyper-parenting or like
  good parenting (encouraging and allowing your
  children to flourish)?

94
Summary

• Sandel thinks that the use of PGD and or GE to
  enhance our children is morally wrong because
• It damages the parent-child relationship
• It encourages parents to be arrogant
• It leads to badgering and finally rejection of
  children
• Which, all combined, doesnt let the child
  flourish fulfill its natural potential

95
Next Time

• John Robertsons framework for seeing if uses of
  PGD are moral or not (applied to happiness)
• Julian Savulescus argument for why it is morally
  mandatory for us to enhance our children

96
Happiness and Biotechnology 3

• PHIL 106 2008
• Dan Turton

97
Last Time

• Sandel thinks that the use of PGD and or GE to
  enhance our children is morally wrong because
• It damages the parent-child relationship
• It leads to badgering and finally rejection
• Which doesnt let the child flourish fulfill
  its natural potential
• But could PGD and GE help a child fulfill its
  potential?

98
Today

• John Robertsons framework for assessing the
  morality of using PGD applied to happiness
• Julian Savulescus argument for why it is morally
  mandatory for us to enhance our children

99
Robertson

• The science required for PGD for happiness is not
  that close but it might be possible
• Considers some moral objections to PGD and finds
  non of them convincing
• Proposes a framework for testing whether it would
  be moral to use PGD to screen for certain
  dispositions/traits

100
Embryo Rights

• Embryos are persons with rights (like grown ups)
• PGD creates embryos and then kills most of them
  unnecessarily
• It is morally wrong to kill people unnecessarily
• Therefore, it is morally wrong to use PGD
• 3-day old embryos dont have rights

101
Eugenics

• PGD is a form of eugenics because it is trying to
  improve the gene-pool by removing weaker
  specimens
• Eugenics is morally wrong (e.g. Nazis)
• Therefore, it is morally wrong to use PGD
• Coercive eugenics (killing and sterilsing people
  who didnt want to be) is morally wrong
• But its not clear that PGD is coercive eugenics

102
Stigmatisation

• PGD is all about avoiding having a disabled child
• Focusing on and promoting the idea that having a
  disability is so terrible stigmatises people
  with disabilities
• Stigmatising people with disabilities is morally
  wrong
• Therefore, it is morally wrong to use PGD
• Stigmatising the disabled is wrong and should be
  avoided as much as possible
• But the benefits that might come from PGD seem to
  outweigh the cost of a bit of stigmatisation

103
Un-Openness to the Unbidden

• Using PGD to select an enhanced embryo
  encourages parents not treat the resulting
  children as valuable unbidden gifts
• Not treating children as valuable unbidden gifts
  degrades the parent-child relationship
• It is immoral to encourage the degradation of the
  parent-child relationship
• Therefore, it is morally wrong to use PGD to
  select an enhanced embryo
• Selection of embryos using PGD is just like
  selecting a good mate
• Should we choose our mates by random chance?

104
Welfare of the Offspring

• PGD will commodify embryos, which will
  encourage parents to have undue expectations of
  how their children should develop
• When parents have undue expectations for their
  children it is bad for their childrens welfare
• Unnecessarily decreasing childrens welfare is
  morally wrong
• Therefore, it is morally wrong to use PGD
• Some parents will be like this regardless of if
  they have access to PGD
• PGD isnt morally bad, some parents are morally
  bad

105
Robertsons PGD Framework

• Two questions/tests to see if a new use for PGD
  should be allowed
• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty? and
• If they are, would those decisions impose harm
  or burdens on others that justify discouraging or
  barring them?

106
Procreative Liberty

• Freedom from interference with procreative
  matters including
• The freedom to decide to reproduce or not
  reproduce
• Some choice over the genetic make up of your
  prospective children (mate selection)

107
Passing Test 1

• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty?
• These kinds of decisions often have the goal of
  rearing healthy offspring
• Yes pass (go on to the second test)
• E.g. Using PGD to select a non-genetically
  diseased embryo Avoiding mating with someone
  with an inherited disease
• No fail (go home and try to do it the natural
  way)
• E.g. Using PGD to select a very very genetically
  disabled embryo very unusual procreative
  behaviour

108
Passing Test 2

• When test 1 is passed, the onus goes to the
  person wanting to restrict the parents
  procreative liberty
• They need to provide a good reason for doing so
• Would those decisions impose harm or burdens on
  others that justify discouraging or barring
  them?
• Note that imposing harm on the offspring with PGD
  is hard to do because that particular embryo
  would not have been born at all without PGD
• Yes fail (dont be so greedy)
• No pass (lets book you a PGD appointment!)

109
Framework in Use Gender Selection

• PGD for gender variety/family balancing
• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty?
• Yes it is common to want a certain gender child
  because of the different raising experience it
  offers
• But it is uncommon to be able to choose the
  gender!
• Would those decisions impose harm or burdens on
  others that justify discouraging or barring
  them?
• No as long as it was for balancing there is no
  stigmatisation etc.
• Robertsons verdict
• PASS lets book you a PGD appointment!

110
Framework in Use Avoiding Deafness

• PGD for avoiding or deafness
• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty?
• Yes it is common to want children with normal
  hearing ability
• But it is uncommon to be able to choose the
  hearing ability!
• Would those decisions impose harm or burdens on
  others that justify discouraging or barring
  them?
• No the deaf community is not stigmatised
  because they still have rights etc.
• But perhaps their lives would be worse if there
  were less deaf people
• Robertsons verdict
• PASS lets book you a PGD appointment!

111
Framework in Use Selecting for Deafness

• PGD for deafness!
• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty?
• Yes it is common to want a child that can share
  in your culture
• But it is uncommon to be able to choose deafness!
• Would those decisions impose harm or burdens on
  others that justify discouraging or barring
  them?
• No otherwise the deaf child would not have had
  a life at all
• But we would never allow parents pop a babies
  eardrums to make them deaf!
• Robertsons verdict
• PASS lets book you a PGD appointment!

112
Problems with the Framework

• Is there anything that they wouldn't allow?
• The questions/tests are not clear enough
• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty?
• Robertson seems to think we should have the
  freedom to get what we want in terms of type of
  child, just because it is common to want it
• Would those decisions impose harm or burdens on
  others that justify discouraging or barring
  them?
• While the child might not be harmed, would we
  prefer the world with the harmed child or the
  normal child?

113
Framework in Use Selecting for Happiness

• PGD for happiness
• Are parents making the type of decision that
  falls within common understanding of procreative
  liberty?
• Yes it is common to want a child to be happy
• Would those decisions impose harm or burdens on
  others that justify discouraging or barring
  them?
• No in fact everyone might benefit from having
  happy people around
• The verdict?

114
Summing up Robertson

• Procreative liberty, if understood broadly, puts
  the onus on the objector to PGD to show who will
  be harmed by its use
• Procreative liberty does not allow us to
  intentionally kill people though
• So, if embryos are people, PGD might still be
  immoral
• But there needs to be a robust definition of
  person that gets around objections for this to
  work recall abortion-type arguments

115
Savulescu

• Thinks that some enhancements that PGD and/or GE
  can provide would make childrens lives much
  better, whatever they chose to do later in life.
• Thinks parents are morally obliged to provide
  these kinds of enhancements to their children if
  they can

116
Savulescus Argument

• Some enhancements that PGD and/or GE can provide
  are good for children because they increase their
  chances for a good life
• Parents should do what they can to increase their
  childrens chances of having a good life
• Therefore, there are some enhancements that
  parents should choose for their children
• It is morally wrong to stop parents from helping
  their children to have better lives (when no one
  else is harmed)
• Therefore, it is morally wrong to prevent parents
  using PGD and/or GE for some enhancements

117
Summing up Savulescu

• Some enhancements that PGD and/or GE can provide
  are good for children, no matter what they choose
  to do with their lives, because they increase
  their chances for a good life
• Which enhancements?
• Savulescu memory, empathy
• Presumably happiness too

118
Summary

• The verdicts on using PGD and/or GE to enhance
  our childrens happiness
• Sandel morally wrong
• Because it doesnt let the child flourish
  fulfill its natural potential (which is what good
  parents are supposed to do)
• Robertson morally permissible
• Because procreative liberty includes wanting a
  happy child and no one is harmed by it
• Savelescu morally mandatory
• Because it will give children a better chance of
  living a good life (which is what good parents
  are supposed to do)

119
You Decide

• Your verdict on using PGD and/or GE to enhance
  our childrens happiness
• Morally wrong? Permissible? or mandatory?

120
Find Out and Do More

• What is the current-ish state of PGD in New
  Zealand?
• http//www.bioethics.org.nz/downloads/pre-birth-te
  sting.pdf
• What might the future hold for New Zealands
  bioethical regulations and how can I have my say?
• http//www.bioethics.org.nz/
• Find out when the next public forum is and go!

121
Next Time

• Global Justice with Ramon Das