PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 14, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Theory and Practical Applications of the Minimal Existential Pursuit Right in Bioethics, Biomedicine, and Environmental Ethics

View Full Paper
HPHD PH

Key Points

  • The aim is to present a structured framework for understanding the Minimal Existential Pursuit Right and its implications across varied ethical domains.
  • Systematic exposition of the Minimal Existential Pursuit Right (MEPR) and its applications.
  • Analysis of bioethical issues including euthanasia and genetic modification within the MEPR framework.
  • Discussion of ecological protection via a non-anthropocentric and non-biocentric approach.
  • Introduced a logical framework emphasizing structural integrity over traditional moral norms.
  • Demonstrated that the MEPR can guide ethical discussions in bioethics and environmental ethics.
  • Identified key principles for application in legal and policy contexts.

Abstract

This paper presents a systematic exposition of the Minimal Existential Pursuit Right (MEPR) and its applications in bioethics, biomedicine, and environmental ethics, grounded in the Universal Ontological Formula (UOF). Rather than deriving ethical obligations from moral realism, cultural values, or metaphysical assumptions, the framework identifies normativity as a structural consequence of the conditions that make first-person normative discourse possible. The central claim is that any subject capable of maintaining an ontological boundary and engaging in self-referential normative interaction possesses a minimal, non-negotiable right to preserve the conditions of its own existential pursuit. This right is strictly threshold-based and does not admit degrees, sentimental extensions, or rights inflation. Entities failing to meet the minimal threshold do not bear rights; however, their preservation may still be normatively required insofar as they constitute necessary infrastructural conditions for entities that do. The paper applies this framework to core bioethical problems—including euthanasia, assisted dying, consent manipulation, genetic modification, and limits of medical intervention—by reframing them in terms of structural integrity rather than moral permission or prohibition. In environmental ethics, it offers a non-anthropocentric yet non-biocentric account of ecological protection, grounding conservation obligations in logical constraints on the preservation of existential conditions rather than intrinsic value attribution. Finally, the work formalizes several key principles—such as non-transferability of normative authority, rate-of-change constraints on identity modification, and constitutional time as a normative resource—demonstrating the framework’s readiness for legal, constitutional, and policy-level application. The result is a unified, logically closed ethical architecture designed to remain robust under future biological and technological transformations. Keyword: Minimal Existential Pursuit Right (MEPR) Universal Ontological Formula (UOF) Ontological Boundary Normative Structure Existential Threshold First-Person Normativity Structural Normativity Bioethics Environmental EthicsBioethics

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

HD PH (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6966f32713bf7a6f02c00eb0https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18210700
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper