Autonomy and Enhancement

Abstract

Some have objected to human enhancement on the grounds that it violates the autonomy of the enhanced. These objections, however, overlook the interesting possibility that autonomy itself could be enhanced. How, exactly, to enhance autonomy is a difficult problem due to the numerous and diverse accounts of autonomy in the literature. Existing accounts of autonomy enhancement rely on narrow and controversial conceptions of autonomy. However, we identify one feature of autonomy common to many mainstream accounts: reasoning ability. Autonomy can then be enhanced by improving people’s reasoning ability, in particular through cognitive enhancement; given how valuable autonomy is usually taken to be, this gives us extra reason to pursue such cognitive enhancements. Moreover, autonomy-based objections will be especially weak against such enhancements. As we will argue, those who are worried that enhancements will inhibit people’s autonomy should actually embrace those enhancements that will improve autonomy.

Attitudes toward pharmacological cognitive enhancement—a review

“…While opponents of enhancement consider it a “threat to the responsibility one bears for one's own life” (Habermas, 2003 , p. 61), proponents instead focus on its advantages. They point out that PCE in particular entails the possibility of enhancing autonomy itself by increasing the reasoning abilities required to engage in such autonomous decisions (Schaefer et al, 2013 ).…”

The Posthuman as Hollow Idol: A Nietzschean Critique of Human Enhancement

“…To illustrate how particular technologies are in this way qualified as "human enhancement technologies," I give three examples: Inserting a brain implant for extra information storage can be considered as a human enhancement technology, because (1) inserting a brain implant for extra information storage can improve (inter alia) memory, (2) improving memory can improve (inter alia) rational thinking, and (3) rational thinking is identified as a preferred value. Genetic manipulation can be considered as a human enhancement technology, because (1) genetic modification can improve (inter alia) deductive/logical competence, (2) improving deductive/logical competence can enhance (inter alia) autonomy, and (3) autonomy is identified as a preferred value (Schaefer, Kahane, and Savulescu, 2014). Nootropics can be considered as a human enhancement technology, because (1) nootropics increase (inter alia) IQ, (2) giving more people the opportunity to increase their IQ will lead to (inter alia) more equality, and (3) equality is identified as a preferred value.…”

Can self-validating neuroenhancement be autonomous?

“…Autonomy plays an important role in common morality and in moral philosophy (see, e.g., Beauchamp and Childress 2013) and questions related to autonomy have already gathered a significant amount of attention in the moral philosophical literature on human enhancement (see, e.g., Heilinger and Crone 2014;Juth 2011;Pömsl and Friedrich 2017;Schaefer et al 2014). Yet whether self-validating neuroenhancement-neuroenhancement in which an individual's endorsement of her new self is caused by the enhancement process she underwent-can be autonomous would not appear to have received due consideration.…”