Neuroenhancement in Reflective Equilibrium: A Qualified Kantian Defense of Enhancing in Scholarship and Science
- PDF / 234,499 Bytes
- 12 Pages / 547.087 x 737.008 pts Page_size
- 5 Downloads / 145 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Neuroenhancement in Reflective Equilibrium: A Qualified Kantian Defense of Enhancing in Scholarship and Science C. D. Meyers
Received: 27 March 2014 / Accepted: 8 June 2014 # Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
Abstract Cognitive neuroenhancement (CNE) involves the use of medical interventions to improve normal cognitive functioning such as memory, focus, concentration, or willpower. In this paper I give a Kantian argument defending the use of CNE in science, scholarly research, and creative fields. Kant’s universal law formulation of the categorical imperative shows why enhancement is morally wrong in the familiar contexts of sports or competitive games. This argument, however, does not apply to the use of CNE in higher education, scholarly or scientific research, or creative endeavors such as visual art, fiction or poetry, or musical composition. This is because performance in these areas is embedded within practices that differ in morally significant ways from competitive practices. This important difference provides good reason to think that there is nothing morally wrong with the use of CNE in these areas. My approach is not simply to assume a full-fledged Kantian ethical theory and apply it straight away to the enhancement issue but to establish a reflective equilibrium between our moral intuitions, (Kantian) moral principles that support those intuitions, and the nature of the practices involved.
Keywords Enhancement . Neuroenhancement . Ethics . Reflective equilibrium . Kant . Categorical imperative . Sport . Competition C. D. Meyers (*) Department of Philosophy and Religion, University of Southern Mississippi, 118 College Dr. #5015, Hattiesburg, MS 39406, USA e-mail: [email protected]
‘Enhancement’ refers to medical interventions intended to improve on human form and function beyond what is necessary to sustain or restore good health [1].1 In this paper I will focus on cognitive neuro-enhancement (CNE): medical interventions intended to improve memory, focus, concentration, creativity, or will power. Today CNEs usually take the form of prescription medications, such as Ritalin or Modafinil, used by students, scientists, or scholars to improve academic study or research. CNEs could also be used as enhancements in sports, especially in competitive games like chess. News media coverage has brought increasing attention to the use of such enhancement, especially among college students and those who work in high-tech industries, though both the prevalence and effectiveness of such practices have been exaggerated [5]. For the sake of discussion, I will assume that the cognitive enhancements are totally safe (or no less safe than coffee or aspirin)2 and that they are affective enough so as to provide a substantial benefit to those that receive them. If CNEs were not safe then people would have good reasons—prudential and maybe even moral reasons—
1
Some scholars have cast doubt on the moral relevance of the therapy/enhancement distinction or on the possibility of even making such a
Data Loading...
