Commenting on Bogardus

"What if we could put you in a machine that would zap your body and change you at the molecular level to make you a physical duplicate of yourself but with your sex swapped? Is it even theoretically possible to change sex?

Yes, I think there are situations where it would be possible to change sex. If you took at CRISP technology, it seems that one day we could take an embryo XY and swap out the Y chromosome for an X chromosome and I think the thing to say now and I think Aristotle would say this is that this embryo now has the natural disposition to produce ova when functioning properly. Although there was this artificial intervention, still I think the thing to say is now this embryo has all that's required and is sort of naturally disposed to go down the developmental pathway that results ultimately in ova. So that would be a kind of sex change at least at the level of an embryo.  It certainly would be more complicated for a full-grown human, but if the answer is just is it conceptually possible to change sex, then yes.  In fact, there are organisms that do change sex, such as the clownfish.  So not only is it hypothetically possible for an organism to change sex it actually happens.

But maybe the more relevant question is whether it is feasible, given our current technology, for a human to change sex?  I don't think so. It would take quite a lot more technological advancement to reach that point."

(The quote has been slightly modified for style.)

For a successful sex change to occur, it seems a few conditions are required:  The organs must be capable of trying to reproduce and they must be appropriately linked with the rest of the person’s body; that is, the organs should be directed at the person in question’s reproduction.  These requirements exclude head transplants and genital transplants as avenues of successful sex changes. 

Still, given the possible machine discussed in Bogardus, it seems that both conditions could be satisfied.  This would require a genetic rewrite of the organism.  There’s still a way to disagree with Bogardus that this would be a successful sex change, however. For it could be that genetic identity is necessary for a person or organism’s identity . If such a genetic change were to occur, then, it wouldn’t be an organism changing into another sex, but another organism coming to replace the initial one.   It seems quite plausible to think that genetic identity is necessary for personal identity. 

Or, it could be that such a sex change is immoral on other grounds, even though any resulting sexual unions would be permissible qua sexual union.  Candidates for those other grounds:  Discontentment with what’s supplied. Waste of resources (expensive?).  Unwillingness to adjust one’s will over one’s body or circumstances.  The lines seem to get blurrier, but an argument in this vicinity seems possible.