The Ethics of Genetic Cognitive Enhancement: Gene Editing or Embryo Selection?

Abstract

Recent research with human embryos, in different parts of the world, has sparked a new debate on the ethics of genetic human enhancement. This debate, however, has mainly focused on gene-editing technologies, especially CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats). Less attention has been given to the prospect of pursuing genetic human enhancement by means of IVF (In Vitro Fertilisation) in conjunction with in vitro gametogenesis, genome-wide association studies, and embryo selection. This article examines the different ethical implications of the quest for cognitive enhancement by means of gene-editing on the one hand, and embryo selection on the other. The article focuses on the ethics of cognitive enhancement by means of embryo selection, as this technology is more likely to become commercially available before cognitive enhancement by means of gene-editing. This article argues that the philosophical debate on the ethics of enhancement should take into consideration public attitudes to research on human genomics and human enhancement technologies. The article discusses, then, some of the recent findings of the SIENNA Project, which in 2019 conducted a survey on public attitudes to human genomics and human enhancement technologies in 11 countries (France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea, and United States).

Human Enhancements and Voting: Towards a Declaration of Rights and Responsibilities of Beings

“…Brazil, South Africa, and Poland were most supportive, while the Netherlands, Germany, and France were least supportive of cognitive enhancement technologies [65]." While no definitive conclusion can be reached without a deeper analysis, this disparity at least suggests that it is possible that wealth disparities (either individually or at a country-level) might potentially correlate with the level of support for cognitive enhancement technologies.…”

“…Ref. [65] The work of Professor Nicole A. Vincent and others on neurointerventions and the law is also very relevant to any consideration of cognitive enhancements [66]. For example, ranked-choice voting has been challenging for many voters to understand.…”

“…An example of one representative voting model is the Electoral College system for electing the President in the United States. A small number of electors for each state actually cast the vote for the President that will be counted, and the electors who cast such votes (who are selected by their political party) is determined based on the political party that "won" the direct votes in the state-in other words it is (generally) 65 a "winner take all" system where the individual votes for President for the political party that did not receive a majority of the individual votes overall are disregarded in the final electoral vote total for the state. Although it is rare, 66 this structure means the President that wins the election based on the Electoral College votes could have had the minority of the direct individual votes as a whole for the country.…”

From Self‐Determination to Offspring‐Determination? Reproductive Autonomy, Procrustean Parenting, and Genetic Enhancement

“…Firstly, genetic cognitive enhancement could be a possibility to improve procedural autonomy. Genetic cognitive enhancement refers to improving the likelihood of having a child with increased intelligence, particularly boosting cognitive performance in domains such as working memory, executive function, information processing speed, episodic memory, selective attention, and sustained attention (de Araujo, 2020, p. 3). Admittedly, intelligence is a trait that raises major scientific and social controversies, especially when it is measured only through IQ tests.…”