Journal des systèmes biomédicaux et des technologies émergentes

Soumettre le manuscrit arrow_forward arrow_forward ..

Which Lives Are Important in Regenerative Biomedicine?


Rustom M. Mamlook*

Similar to other logical and mechanical advancements, regenerative biomedicine reflects the benefits of its sociohistorical setting. Social influences, including the value frameworks through which multiplication is both seen and made, have never completely changed the course of human proliferation. In addition, the concepts of race and propagation have always been intertwined throughout the history of western thought. Regardless of whether hidden insights about one's racial genealogy can be discovered, race has been viewed as something that one inherits from their biological parents and cannot change. However, in that frame of mind, race; whether darkness, whiteness, or "in the middle"; should not be considered a biogenetic property; whether logically significant or disparaged. Instead, it ought to be viewed as a socially constructed classification that exhibits or maintains social worth and, as a result, becomes the subject of political debate. Therefore, when examining the role that conceptive biomedicine plays in the esteeming or downgrading of lives on the basis of race or prejudice, we should shift our moral focus away from individual freedoms, independence, and navigation (despite the fact that these aspects continue to be significant) and toward social and political designs and imbalances, power relations, and the role that ideas of race has played in creating and maintaining these. We should try to think about how conceptive biomedical practices come from, participate in, support, and even change these relationships. Conceptive equity should replace regenerative privileges at the end of the day.

Partagez cet article

arrow_upward arrow_upward