No abstract

This theoretical paper draws the scientific community’s attention to how pharmacological cognitive enhancement may impact on society and law. Namely, if safe, reliable, and effective techniques to enhance mental performance are eventually developed, then this may under some circumstances impose new duties onto people in high-responsibility professions—e.g., surgeons or pilots—to use such substances to minimize risks of adverse outcomes or to increase the likelihood of good outcomes. By discussing this topic, we also hope to encourage scientists to bring their expertise to bear on this current public debate.

We normally think that responsibility tracks mental capacity — i.e. that people’s responsibility diminishes when their mental capacities are compromised, and that it is restored as those capacities are regained. But how is responsibility affected when mental capacities are extended beyond their normal range? Would cognitively enhanced people become “hyper responsible”, and if so then in what sense? Might they acquire new responsibilities? Could they be blamed for failing to discharge those responsibilities? Would this make them more prone to being liable? Would they necessarily be less irresponsible than their non-enhanced counterparts? Relatedly, might we sometimes have a responsibility to cognitively enhance ourselves, and might we be negligent or maybe even reckless if we don’t do so? This chapter argues that cognitive enhancement affects our responsibility in a range of different ways, and it also suggests some ways in which cognitive enhancement is likely to impact on legal responsibility.