The epidemiology of moral bioenhancement
- PDF / 589,698 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 28 Downloads / 186 Views
SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTION
The epidemiology of moral bioenhancement R. B. Gibson1 Accepted: 1 October 2020 © The Author(s) 2020
Abstract In their 2008 paper, Persson and Savulescu suggest that for moral bioenhancement (MBE) to be effective at eliminating the danger of ‘ultimate harm’ the intervention would need to be compulsory. This is because those most in need of MBE would be least likely to undergo the intervention voluntarily. By drawing on concepts and theories from epidemiology, this paper will suggest that MBE may not need to be universal and compulsory to be effective at significantly improving the collective moral standing of a human populace and reducing the threat of ultimate harm. It will identify similarities between the mechanisms that allow biological contagions (such as a virus) and behaviours (such as those concerned with ethical and unethical actions) to develop, spread, and be reinforced within a population. It will then go onto suggest that, just as with the epidemiological principle of herd immunity, if enough people underwent MBE to reach a minimum threshold then the incidence and spread of immoral behaviours could be significantly reduced, even in those who have not received MBE. Keywords Moral bioenhancement · Epidemiology · Social contagions · Bioethics
Introduction In their 2008 paper, Persson and Savulescu explored whether, given the increasingly destructive potential posed by scientific and technological advancements such as nuclear and biological warfare, moral bioenhancement (MBE) should be developed as a means of closing the gap between our moral faculties and destructive capacities (Persson and Savulescu 2008). They argued that if the development of our destructive capabilities, fuelled by exponential increases in our cognitive faculties, continues unabated then it will need to be accompanied by research into, and the application of, MBE. This is necessary, they argue, as a means to avoid what they term ‘ultimate harm’ (UH); humanity’s self-inflicted destruction. They posit that because those who are most likely to bring about this UH are those same individuals who are least likely to undergo voluntary MBE if developed and proven to be safe, the intervention should be applied on a universal and compulsory scale. Thus, to
ensure the efficacy of MBE, it should be made obligatory, regardless of a person’s original moral baseline. While they defend this view in their 2013 paper (Persson and Savulescu 2013), their more recent work has moved away from this extreme position (Persson and Savulescu 2015, 2019a, b). However, the question of whether MBE should be compulsory, specifically to be effective at reducing or eliminating the risk of UH, has remained relatively unexamined. This paper will address this gap in the literature. To do this, it will explore the idea that by understanding behaviour according to epidemiological models, and specifically in reference to the phenomena of herd immunity, it may be possible for MBE to be effective at reducing or altogether avoiding the risk of UH
Data Loading...
