↓ Skip to main content

The Tortoise Transformation as a Prospect for Life Extension

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
Title
The Tortoise Transformation as a Prospect for Life Extension
Published in
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11673-015-9645-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy F. Murphy

Abstract

The value of extending the human lifespan remains a key philosophical debate in bioethics. In building a case against the extension of the species-typical human life, Nicolas Agar considers the prospect of transforming human beings near the end of their lives into Galapagos tortoises, which would then live on decades longer. A central question at stake in this transformation is the persistence of human consciousness as a condition of the value of the transformation. Agar entertains the idea that consciousness could persist in some measure, but he thinks little is to be gained from the transformation because the experiences available to tortoises pale in comparison to those available to human beings. Moreover, he thinks persisting human consciousness and values would degrade over time, being remade by tortoise needs and environment. The value available in the transformation would not, then, make the additional years of life desirable. Agar's account does not, however, dispose of the tortoise transformation as a defensible preference. Some people might still want this kind of transformation for symbolic reasons, but it would probably be better that no human consciousness persist, since that consciousness would be inexpressible as such. Even so, it is not irrational to prefer various kinds of lifespan extension even if they involve significant modifications to human consciousness and values.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 29%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Lecturer 1 14%
Professor 1 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Philosophy 1 14%
Arts and Humanities 1 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 14%
Psychology 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 December 2016.
All research outputs
#2,170,622
of 23,509,253 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#85
of 613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,399
of 264,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,253 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.