Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:41:23.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cognitive Diversity and Moral Enhancement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2014

CHRIS GYNGELL  and
SIMON EASTEAL
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

One debate in contemporary bioethics centers on whether the development of cognitive enhancement technologies (CETs) will hasten the need for moral enhancement. In this article we provide a new argument in favor of pursuing these enhancement technologies together. The widespread availability of CETs will likely increase population-level cognitive diversity. Different people will choose to enhance different aspects of their cognition, and some won’t enhance themselves at all. Although this has the potential to be beneficial for society, it could also result in harms as people become more different from one another. Aspects of our moral psychology make it difficult for people to cooperate and coordinate actions with those who are very different from themselves. These moral failings could be targeted by moral enhancement technologies, which may improve cooperation among individuals. Moral enhancement technologies will therefore help society maximize the benefits, and reduce the costs, associated with widespread access to cognitive enhancements.

Keywords

moral enhancementcognitive enhancementcognitive diversitycollective problem solvingempathy gap
Type
Special Section: How Moral Is (Moral) Enhancement?
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 66 - 74
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Persson, I, Savulescu, J. The perils of cognitive enhancement and the urgent imperative to enhance the moral character of humanity. Journal of Applied Philosophy 2008;25(3):162–77.Google Scholar

2. Persson, I, Savulescu, J. Unfit for the Future: The Need for Moral Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.Google Scholar

3. See note 1, Persson, Savulescu 2008, at 174.

4. Harris, J. Moral progress and moral enhancement. Bioethics 2013;27(5):285–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

5. Pagel, M. Wired for Culture: The Natural History of Human Cooperation. New York: W. W. Norton; 2013, at 101–103.Google Scholar

6. Parens, E. The goodness of fragility: On the prospect of genetic technologies aimed at the enhancement of human capacities. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 1995;5:141–53, at 149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

7. Selgelid, MJ. Moderate eugenics and human enhancement. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 2014;17(1):3–12.Google Scholar

8. Agar, N. Liberal eugenics. Public Affairs Quarterly 1998;12(2):137–55.Google Scholar

9. Mehta, MA, Swainson, R, Ogilvie, AD, Sahakian, J, Robbins, TW. Improved short-term spatial memory but impaired reversal learning following the dopamine D(2) agonist bromocriptine in human volunteers. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2001;159(1):10–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

10. Housden, C, Morein-Zamir, S, Sahakian, B. Cognitive enhancing drugs: Neuroscience and society. In: Savulescu, J, ter Meulen, R, Kahane, G, eds. Enhancing Human Capacities. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.Google Scholar

11. Nehlig, A. Is caffeine a cognitive enhancer? Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease 2010;20(1 Suppl):S85–94.Google Scholar

12. Yang, A, Palmer, AA, de Wit, H. Genetics of caffeine consumption and responses to caffeine. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2010;211(3):245–57.Google Scholar

13. Hills, T, Hertwig, R. Why aren’t we smarter already: Evolutionary trade-offs and cognitive enhancements. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2011;20(6):373–7.Google Scholar

14. Carson, SH, Peterson, JB, Higgins, DM. Decreased latent inhibition is associated with increased creative achievement in high-functioning individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003;85(3):499–506.Google Scholar

15. Page, SE. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2008.Google Scholar

16. Hong, L, Page, SE. Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2004;101(46):16385–9.Google Scholar

17. See note 15, Page 2008, at 322–323.

18. Smith, A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London: W. Strahan; 1776.Google Scholar

19. Quigley, JM. Urban diversity and economic growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1998;12(2):127–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. Sterelny, K. The Evolved Apprentice: How Evolution Made Humans Unique. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2012, at 18.Google Scholar

21. Szalavitz M. Popping smart pills: The case for cognitive enhancement. Time 2009 Jan 6; available at http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1869435,00.html (last accessed 15 Sep 2014).

22. Williams, K, O’Reilly, C. Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior 1998;20:77–140.Google Scholar

23. Wright O, Taylor J. Cameron: My war on multiculturalism. The Independent 2011 Feb 5; available at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-my-war-on-multiculturalism-2205074.html (last accessed 15 Sep 2014).

24. Trout, J. The Empathy Gap: Building Bridges to the Good Life and the Good Society. New York: Penguin; 2009.Google Scholar

25. Dziobek, I, Rogers, K, Fleck, S, Bahnemann, M, Heekeren, HR, Wolf, OT, et al. Dissociation of cognitive and emotional empathy in adults with Asperger syndrome using the Multifaceted Empathy Test (MET). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 2008;38(3):464–73.Google Scholar