Biotechnological moral enhancement
Table of contents
Share
QR
Metrics
Biotechnological moral enhancement
Annotation
PII
S023620070002342-3-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Roman Belyaletdinov 
Occupation: Junior Researcher, Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences
Affiliation: Institute of Philosophy RAS
Address: Russian Federation
Edition
Pages
33-38
Abstract

The article deals with the social and humanitarian aspects of moral enhancement of a person by means of biotechnologies. The idea of biotechnological moral enhancement is based on the recent neurotechnological studies that explain the neurobiological foundations of human behavior, including prosocial behavior. Practical use of this knowledge would allow society to get rid of aggression, violence, corruption, and problems related to environmental pollution. A prerequisite for discussing biotechnological moral enhancement is the intention to use biotechnology to solve the problems faced by a person because of the development of science. In the view of the supporters of moral enhancement, the achievements of neuroscience and genetics can provide biotechnological tools for artificial stimulation of moral actions. The most of the technologies do change the genetic, physical, cognitive abilities of a person, and as a result they can change social structures, but they are not specifically aimed at modifying the personal freedom of making a decision, his/her ability to make certain decisions. The article considers both the problem of moral human enhancing from the point of view of its supporters (J. Savulescu, Douglas) and opponents (J. Harris, A. Buchanan) and the technological context of the problem of the moral enhancement. The epistemological shift proposed under the framework of the discussion of the idea of the moral enhancement not only compromises the idea of free will but also puts a person before a difficult task to justify traditional forms of culture and education as competitive forms of the formation of a personality.

Keywords
neurotechnology, technoscience, moral enhancement, oxytocin, biotechnologies
Received
06.11.2018
Date of publication
07.12.2018
Number of purchasers
10
Views
991
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf 100 RUB / 1.0 SU

To download PDF you should sign in

Full text is available to subscribers only
Subscribe right now
Only article and additional services
Whole issue and additional services
All issues and additional services for 2018
1

References

1. Shekspir V. Venetsianskij kupets // Shekspir V. Izbr. proizvedeniya / Per. I.B. Mandel'shtama. M.–L.: GIKhL, 1950.

2. Yudin B.G. Chelovek i mashina: intimnye svyazi? // Rabochie tetradi po bioehtike. Chelovek — NBIC mashina (filosofsko-antropologicheskie i bioehticheskie issledovaniya). Vyp. 18, M.: MosGu, 2014. S. 103–117.

3. Buchanan A. Moral Status and Human Enhancement // Philosophy & Public Affairs. 2009. Vol. 37. No. 4. P. 346–381.

4. Douglas T. Moral bioenhancement, freedom and reasoning // Journal of Medical Ethics. 2014/06. Vol. 40. No. 6. P. 359–360.

5. Harris J., Savulescu J. A debate about moral enhancement //Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2015. Vol. 24. No. 1. P. 8–22.

6. Lawrence D.R., Palacios-Gonzalez C., Harris J. Artificial Intelligence. The Shylock Syndrome // Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2016. Vol. 25. P. 250–261.

7. Persson I., Savulescu J. Moral Transhumanism // Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. No. 35. 2010. P. 660.

8. Rommetveit K., Wynne B. Technoscience, imagined publics and public imaginations // Public Understanding of Science. 2017. Vol. 26. No. 2. P. 133–147.

9. Wasserman D. When bad people do good things: will moral enhancement make the world a better place? //Journal of Medical Ethics. 2014/06. Vol. 40. No. 6. P. 374–375.

10. Weiner K. et al. Have we seen the geneticisation of society? Expectations and evidence // Sociology of health & illness. 2017. Vol. 39. No. 7. P. 989–1004.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate