An issue of our future
possibly including moral enhancements may be summed in the question: How we
would be able to regulate and control these modifications? The Bioethics Commission
holds three goals of neural modification:
“(1) Maintaining or
improving neural health and cognitive function within the range of typical or
statistically normal human functioning, (2) treating neurological disorders,
and (3) expanding or augmenting neural function.”
- Blog.bioethics.gov
Although the third goal presented here could be
associated with efforts to reach radical human enhancements, the commission stresses
their intentions as being only associated with modest cognitive enhancement.
One question that arises
during such discussion is how might we make these enhancements available to the
public? Some organizations view moral enhancement as a necessity for society as
a whole, and feel we need all citizens to participate in order to create a more
supportive, sympathetic society. Would we make this a regulation that people
must follow by taking such medications each day? But that may only prove to be
as effective as vaccinations are in the United States which only a portion of
the population have opted for. Forcedly regulating individuals to take drugs to
change their characteristics and personalities is drastically against citizens’
rights.
There is also an option of
not requiring all citizens to participate in moral enhancements. Yet for this
option, moral enhancements then fall under even more ethical questions similar
to those interrogating human enhancement such as stamina, improved memory, etc.
Even though moral enhancements could have many benefits for those who utilize
them, these enhancements may only be available to those who have the money to
pay for them: the higher socioeconomic classes. If one class were allowed to
significantly improve morally while the other class remains then same, would
they still want to help the immoral classes below them? As much research shows,
drugs used currently in treatments (i.e. Prozac, Oxytocin, etc) do help improve
empathy, but can also cause empathy to be concentrated within a group and lead
individuals to be less empathetic to others who are outside the group.
As technology improves and
research expands, many of these side effects and consequences of drugs may no
longer apply to moral enhancement. But as we get closer to possible
implementing moral enhancement into society, questions of regulation will
continue to raise more issues.
Interesting Links:
Blog.bioethics.gov
http://blog.bioethics.gov/2015/04/09/bioethics-commission-makes-recommendation-on-equitable-access-to-safe-and-effective-neural-modifiers/
As we inch ever-closer to the "brave new world" of soma-induced bliss...
ReplyDeleteI wonder: is drug-induced empathy real? Or maybe that's the wrong question. Whatever has real effects is real enough. But is it admirable? As we enhance our capacities do we diminish our worthiness as moral agents? Certainly not, if we merely reinforce our most primordial tribal instincts and an "us against them" mentality.
And yet, surely the judicious use of chemical intervention to smooth out the roughest edges of maladaptive social behavior would be a boon to society? Question is how we define "judicious"...