Response argues against Sakr's critique, emphasizing the role of bodyoids in ethical discourse around human norms.
This response is to Sakr’s (2026) critique of arguments I made in a previous article about ‘bodyoids’—human bodies that would be engineered to lack consciousness and sentience. I argue that while Sakr may be correct that bodyoids possess symbolic value, he does not establish that their instrumental use would seriously risk undermining norms of respect for human beings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Isaac Anderson Wagner (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: