Moral enhancement and cheapened achievement: Psychedelics, virtual reality and AI.

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-11-20 DOI:10.1111/bioe.13374
Emma C Gordon, Katherine Cheung, Brian D Earp, Julian Savulescu
{"title":"Moral enhancement and cheapened achievement: Psychedelics, virtual reality and AI.","authors":"Emma C Gordon, Katherine Cheung, Brian D Earp, Julian Savulescu","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A prominent critique of cognitive or athletic enhancement claims that certain performance-improving drugs or technologies may 'cheapen' resulting achievements. Considerably less attention has been paid to the impact of enhancement on the value of moral achievements. Would the use of moral enhancement (bio)technologies, rather than (solely) 'traditional' means of moral development like schooling and socialization, cheapen the 'achievement' of morally improving oneself? We argue that, to the extent that the 'cheapened achievement' objection succeeds in the domains of cognitive or athletic enhancement, it could plausibly also succeed in the domain of moral enhancement-but only regarding certain forms. Specifically, although the value of moral self-improvement may be diminished by some of the more speculative and impractical forms of moral enhancement proposed in the literature, this worry has less force when applied to more plausibly viable forms of moral enhancement: forms in which drugs or technologies play an adjunctive or facilitative, rather than a determinative, role in moral improvement. We illustrate this idea with three examples from recent literature: the possible use of psychedelic drugs in certain moral-learning contexts, 'Socratic Al' (a proposed Al-driven moral enhancer) and empathy enhancement through virtual reality (VR). We argue that if one assumes that these technologies work roughly as advertised, the 'cheapened achievement' objection loses much of its bite. The takeaway lesson is that moral enhancement in its most promising and practical forms ultimately evades a leading critique of cognitive and athletic enhancement. We end by reflecting on the potential upshot of our analysis for enhancement debates more widely.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13374","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A prominent critique of cognitive or athletic enhancement claims that certain performance-improving drugs or technologies may 'cheapen' resulting achievements. Considerably less attention has been paid to the impact of enhancement on the value of moral achievements. Would the use of moral enhancement (bio)technologies, rather than (solely) 'traditional' means of moral development like schooling and socialization, cheapen the 'achievement' of morally improving oneself? We argue that, to the extent that the 'cheapened achievement' objection succeeds in the domains of cognitive or athletic enhancement, it could plausibly also succeed in the domain of moral enhancement-but only regarding certain forms. Specifically, although the value of moral self-improvement may be diminished by some of the more speculative and impractical forms of moral enhancement proposed in the literature, this worry has less force when applied to more plausibly viable forms of moral enhancement: forms in which drugs or technologies play an adjunctive or facilitative, rather than a determinative, role in moral improvement. We illustrate this idea with three examples from recent literature: the possible use of psychedelic drugs in certain moral-learning contexts, 'Socratic Al' (a proposed Al-driven moral enhancer) and empathy enhancement through virtual reality (VR). We argue that if one assumes that these technologies work roughly as advertised, the 'cheapened achievement' objection loses much of its bite. The takeaway lesson is that moral enhancement in its most promising and practical forms ultimately evades a leading critique of cognitive and athletic enhancement. We end by reflecting on the potential upshot of our analysis for enhancement debates more widely.

道德的提升与成就的贬低:迷幻剂、虚拟现实和人工智能。
对认知能力或运动能力提升的一个著名批评声称,某些提高成绩的药物或技术可能会 "降低 "由此产生的成就。人们对提高成绩对道德成就价值的影响的关注要少得多。使用道德提升(生物)技术,而不是(单纯的)"传统 "道德发展手段,如学校教育和社会化,是否会降低道德提升自我的 "成就"?我们认为,如果说 "降低成就感 "的反对意见在认知或运动能力提升领域取得了成功,那么在道德提升领域也有可能取得成功--但仅限于某些形式。具体地说,虽然道德自我完善的价值可能会被文献中提出的一些更具投机性和不切实际的道德提升形式所削弱,但当这种担忧适用于更合理可行的道德提升形式时,其力量就会减弱:在这些形式中,药物或技术在道德完善中起到辅助或促进作用,而不是决定性作用。我们用最近文献中的三个例子来说明这一观点:在某些道德学习情境中可能使用的迷幻药、"苏格拉底艾尔"(一种由艾尔驱动的道德增强剂)以及通过虚拟现实(VR)增强同理心。我们认为,如果假定这些技术的效果与广告宣传的大致相同,那么 "降低成就 "的反对意见就会失去很多说服力。我们从中得到的启示是,最有前途、最实用的道德增强技术最终会避开对认知和运动增强技术的主要批评。最后,我们将反思我们的分析对更广泛的增强辩论可能产生的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信