Getting Moral Enhancement Right: The Desirability of Moral Bioenhancement

Persson, Ingmar; Savulescu, Julian

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01907.x

Cited by 120 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…10 See the discussion on 'freedom to fall' within the moral enhancement debate [4, 13, 19, 43, 49-51; and others]. According to Persson & Savulescu [3], Harris fears that moral bioenhancement will Bmake the freedom to do immoral things impossible, rather than simply make the doing of them wrong and giving us moral, legal and prudential reasons to refrain^ [4: 105]. Which basically entails that he fears that we will no longer act for reasons, but will become Bmindless robots^ [3: 128].…”

Section: Do Means Matter: Direct Vs Indirect and Active Vs Passive Momentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 According to recent neuroimaging studies, and in line with developmental studies, moral reasoning draws upon a variety of neural networks, involving both affective, cognitive and motivational processes: BThe regions recruited in moral cognition underlie specific states of emotions, along with cognitive and motivational processes, which emerge and interconnect over the course of development to produce adaptive social behavior^ [9: 49, 10, 11]. As we mature, increased 'communication' (structural and functional integration) between these networks takes place: BThus, what develops is not only theory of mind but also the ability to integrate knowledge about others' thoughts with information about consequences and emotions in the context of moral judgment^ [9: 53].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The means that are suggested to reach moral enhancement may also differ substantially. For example, Persson and Savulescu [3] argue that there is an urgent need to discover biological and genetic means of moral enhancement, while others argue that many useful ways of morally enhancing individuals are already at our disposal. For instance, John Harris [4] reminds us of various attractive and effective examples of moral enhancement that are readily available, tried and tested (e.g., moral education), but have received little attention in the moral enhancement literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?

Focquaert

Schermer²

2015

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the reasons why moral enhancement may be controversial, is because the advantages of moral enhancement may fall upon society rather than on those who are enhanced. If directed at individuals with certain counter-moral traits it may have direct societal benefits by lowering immoral behavior and increasing public safety, but it is not directly clear if this also benefits the individual in question. In this paper, we will discuss what we consider to be moral enhancement, how different means may be used to achieve it and whether the means we employ to reach moral enhancement matter morally. Are certain means to achieve moral enhancement wrong in themselves? Are certain means to achieve moral enhancement better than others, and if so, why? More specifically, we will investigate whether the difference between direct and indirect moral enhancement matters morally. Is it the case that indirect means are morally preferable to direct means of moral enhancement and can we indeed pinpoint relevant intrinsic, moral differences between both? We argue that the distinction between direct and indirect means is indeed morally relevant, but only insofar as it tracks an underlying distinction between active and passive interventions. Although passive interventions can be ethical provided specific safeguards are put in place, these interventions exhibit a greater potential to compromise autonomy and disrupt identity.

show abstract

Section: Do Means Matter: Direct Vs Indirect and Active Vs Passive Momentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?

Focquaert

Schermer²

2015

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Persson and Savulescu argue against Harris in several ways 17. Where the issue of freedom is concerned, they do it in the following manner.…”

Section: Moral Enhancement As a Companion To Cognitive Enhancementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voluntary moral enhancement and the survival-at-any-cost bias

Rakić

2013

J Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I discuss the argument of Persson and Savulescu that moral enhancement ought to accompany cognitive enhancement, as well as briefly addressing critiques of this argument, notably by John Harris. I argue that Harris, who believes that cognitive enhancement is largely sufficient for making us behave more morally, might be disposing too easily of the great quandary of our moral existence: the gap between what we do and what we believe is morally right to do. In that regard, Persson and Savulescu's position has the potential to offer more. However, I question Persson and Savulescu's proposal of compulsory moral enhancement (a conception they used to promote), proposing the alternative of voluntary moral enhancement.

show abstract

“…Should the use of biomedical moral enhancements be permissible (for instance, [3,4]), or are they, from the perspective of the common good, merely desirable (e.g., [5])? Still others argue that it is imperative to pursue the development of such enhancements, leaving open how they should be administered [6][7][8]. These questions already bring us to the papers in this issue, all of which deal with the implications moral enhancement might have in the political sphere.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%