S Matthew Liao

Director of the Center for Bioethics

Arthur Zitrin Professor of Bioethics

Professional overview

Dr. Matthew Liao uses the tools of philosophy to study and examine the ramifications of novel biomedical innovations.

A speaker at TEDxCERN, Dr. Liao discussed whether it is ethical for someone to erase certain aspects of their memories and how doing so might affect that individual's identity. He has also given a TED talk in New York and been featured in the New York Times, The Atlantic, The Guardian, and other numerous media outlets.

The author and editor of four books, Dr. Liao provides the academic community with a collection of human rights essays. In The Right to be Loved, he explores the philosophical foundations underpinning children's right to be loved, and proposes that we reconceptualize our policies concerning adoptions so that individuals who are not romantically linked can co-adopt a child together.

Dr. Liao provides students with an education grounded in a broad conception of bioethics encompassing both medical and environmental ethics. He offers students the opportunity to explore the intersection of human rights practice with central domains of public health and regularly teaches normative theory and neuroethics. His courses address how the rightness or wrongness of an act is determined and ethical issues arising out of new medical technologies such as embryonic stem cell research, cloning, artificial reproduction, and genetic engineering; ethical issues raised by the development and use of neuroscientific technologies such as the ethics of erasing traumatic memories; the ethics of mood and cognitive enhancements; and moral and legal implications of "mind-reading" technologies for brain privacy.

To learn more about Dr. Liao and his work, visit his website and blog.

Education

AB, Politics (Magna Cum Laude), Princeton University, Princeton, NJ

DPhil, Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Honors and awards

Outstanding Academic Title, The Right to Be Loved, Choice Review (2016)

TEDx Speaker at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland (2015)

TEDx Speaker, New York, NY (2013)

Humanities Grant Initiative, NYU (2011)

Big Think Delphi Fellow (2011)

Areas of research and study

Bioethics

Epistemology

Metaphysics

Moral Psychology

Publications

Publications

Neuroethical concerns about moderating traumatic memories

Liao, S. M., Liao, S. M., & Wasserman, D. T. (n.d.).

Publication year

2007

Journal title

American Journal of Bioethics

Volume

7

Issue

9

Page(s)

38-40

10.1080/15265160701518623

Abstract

Abstract

~

The Ashley treatment : Best interests, convenience, and parental decision-making

Liao, S. M., Liao, S. M., Savulescu, J., & Sheehan, M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2007

Journal title

Hastings Center Report

Volume

37

Issue

2

Page(s)

16-20

10.1353/hcr.2007.0027

Abstract

Abstract

~

Time-relative interests and abortion

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2007

Journal title

Journal of Moral Philosophy

Volume

4

Issue

2

Page(s)

242-256

10.1177/1740468107079268

Abstract

Abstract

The concept of a time-relative interest is introduced by Jeff McMahan to solve certain puzzles about the badness of death. Some people (e.g. McMahan and David DeGrazia) believe that this concept can also be used to show that abortion is permissible. In this paper, I first argue that if the Time-Relative Interest Account permits abortion, then it would also permit infanticide. I next reject the suggestion that the Time-Relative Interest Account can at least explain the permissibility of early abortion, even if it cannot explain the permissibility of late abortion. Given this, early and late abortions have to be justified on other grounds.

The Embryo Rescue Case

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2006

Journal title

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics

Volume

27

Issue

2

Page(s)

141-147

10.1007/s11017-005-1390-z

Abstract

Abstract

In the debate regarding the moral status of human embryos, the Embryo Rescue Case has been used to suggest that embryos are not rightholders. This case is premised on the idea that in a situation where one has a choice between saving some number of embryos or a child, it seems wrong to save the embryos and not the child. If so, it seems that embryos cannot be rightholders. In this paper, I argue that the Embryo Rescue Case does not independently show that embryos are not rightholders.

The idea of a duty to love

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2006

Journal title

Journal of Value Inquiry

Volume

40

Issue

1

Page(s)

1-22

10.1007/s10790-007-9013-8

Abstract

Abstract

~

The organism view defended

Liao, S. M., & Matthew Liao, S. (n.d.).

Publication year

2006

Journal title

Monist

Volume

89

Issue

3

Page(s)

334-350

10.5840/monist200689315

Abstract

Abstract

~

The right of children to be loved

Liao, S. M., & Matthew Liao, S. (n.d.).

Publication year

2006

Journal title

Journal of Political Philosophy

Volume

14

Issue

4

Page(s)

420-440

10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00262.x

Abstract

Abstract

~

Are 'ex ante' enhancements always permissible?

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2005

Journal title

American Journal of Bioethics

Volume

5

Issue

3

Page(s)

23-25

10.1080/15265160591002692

Abstract

Abstract

~

Rescuing human embryonic stem cell research : The blastocyst transfer method

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2005

Journal title

American Journal of Bioethics

Volume

5

Issue

6

Page(s)

8-16

10.1080/15265160500318746

Abstract

Abstract

Despite the therapeutic potential of human embryonic stem (HES) cells, many people believe that HES cell research should be banned. The reason is that the present method of extracting HES cells involves the destruction of the embryo, which for many is the beginning of a person. This paper examines a number of compromise solutions such as parthenogenesis, the use of defective embryos, genetically creating a "pseudo embryo" that can never form a placenta, and determining embryo death, and argues that none of these proposals are likely to satisfy embryoists, that is, those who regard the embryo as a person. This paper then proposes a method of extracting HES cells, what might be called the Blastocyst Transfer Method, that meets the ethical requirements of embryoists, and it considers some possible concerns regarding this method. It concludes by encouraging future HES cell research to investigate this method.

Response to commentators on "Rescuing human embryonic stem cell research : The blastocyst transfer method" [1]

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2005

Journal title

American Journal of Bioethics

Volume

5

Issue

6

Page(s)

W10-W13

10.1080/15265160500388616

Abstract

Abstract

~

The ethics of using genetic engineering for sex selection

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2005

Journal title

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volume

31

Issue

2

Page(s)

116-118

10.1136/jme.2003.005983

Abstract

Abstract

It is quite likely that parents will soon be able to use genetic engineering to select the sex of their child by directly manipulating the sex of an embryo. Some might think that this method would be a more ethical method of sex selection than present technologies such as preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) because, unlike PGD, it does not need to create and destroy "wrong gendered" embryos. This paper argues that those who object to present technologies on the grounds that the embryo is a person are unlikely to be persuaded by this proposal, though for different reasons.

Eva Feder Kittay, Love's Labor

Liao, S. M., & Liao, S. M. (n.d.).

Publication year

2000

Volume

20

Issue

4

Page(s)

261-63

Abstract

Abstract

~

Kids Deserve Privacy Online. They’re Not Getting It.

Liao, S. M., & Passos Ferreira, C. (n.d.).