> The bite of the lone star tick spreads alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), a condition whose only effect is the creation of a severe but nonfatal red meat allergy.
> Herein, we argue that if eating meat is morally impermissible, then efforts to prevent the spread of tickborne AGS are also morally impermissible.
I would legitimately be worried if they were doctors, but they're philosophers (in medical ethics). Their job is to come up with insane moral edge cases and then try to follow them to their logical conclusion - the siller and more unhinged the better. This is absolutely expected of them.
Many of their other papers have a similar flavour:
- How do we justify research into enhanced warfighters?
- Compulsory moral bioenhancement should be covert
- Abolishing morality in biomedical ethics
> The bite of the lone star tick spreads alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), a condition whose only effect is the creation of a severe but nonfatal red meat allergy.
> Herein, we argue that if eating meat is morally impermissible, then efforts to prevent the spread of tickborne AGS are also morally impermissible.
I sure hope my tax dollars paid for this garbage
I would legitimately be worried if they were doctors, but they're philosophers (in medical ethics). Their job is to come up with insane moral edge cases and then try to follow them to their logical conclusion - the siller and more unhinged the better. This is absolutely expected of them.
Many of their other papers have a similar flavour: