David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 2 (4):45-47 (2011)
In their paper “Deflating the neuroenhancement bubble”, more precisely in their section entitled “How New is Neuroenhancement?”, Lucke and colleagues argue that neuroenhancement is nothing new to our epoch by demonstrating that the use of psychoactive stimulants in the 19th and 20th centuries was already common. The purpose of our comment is to show that the current bubble surrounding neuroenhancement in particular, and enhancement in general, is a recasting of an even older speculative engagement that can be traced back from the 16th to the 18th centuries. As a consequence, there is a high risk that bioethicists might not have captured or found new conceptual challenges related to current enhancement debate. As well, by ignoring issues related to ancient debate, we argue that modern bioethicists risk spending effort on speculative ethics.
|Keywords||enhancement neuroethics speculative ethics applied ethics neuroenhancement|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Frederic Gilbert, Andrej Vranic & Samia Hurst (2013). Involuntary & Voluntary Invasive Brain Surgery: Ethical Issues Related to Acquired Aggressiveness. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 6 (1):115-128.
Similar books and articles
Julian Savulescu & Anders Sandberg (2008). Neuroenhancement of Love and Marriage: The Chemicals Between Us. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 1 (1):31-44.
D. M. Shaw (2012). Neuroenhancers, Addiction and Research Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (10):605-608.
Andreas Heinz, Roland Kipke, Hannah Heimann & Urban Wiesing (2012). Cognitive Neuroenhancement: False Assumptions in the Ethical Debate. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (6):372-375.
Stephanie Bell, Brad Partridge, Jayne Lucke & Wayne Hall (2013). Australian University Students' Attitudes Towards the Acceptability and Regulation of Pharmaceuticals to Improve Academic Performance. Neuroethics 6 (1):197-205.
Brian D. Earp, Anders Sandberg & Julian Savulescu (2012). Natural Selection, Childrearing, and the Ethics of Marriage (and Divorce): Building a Case for the Neuroenhancement of Human Relationships. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):561-587.
Simon Outram (2012). Ethical Considerations in the Framing of the Cognitive Enhancement Debate. Neuroethics 5 (2):173-184.
Danielle C. Turner & Barbara J. Sahakian (2006). Neuroethics of Cognitive Enhancement. Philosophical Explorations 1 (1):113--123.
Arianna Ferrari, Christopher Coenen & Armin Grunwald (2012). Visions and Ethics in Current Discourse on Human Enhancement. NanoEthics 6 (3):215-229.
Jan Christoph Bublitz & Reinhard Merkel (2009). Autonomy and Authenticity of Enhanced Personality Traits. Bioethics 23 (6):360-374.
Dimitris Repantis, Peter Schlattmann, Oona Laisney & Isabella Heuser (2009). Antidepressants for Neuroenhancement in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review. [REVIEW] Poiesis and Praxis 6 (3-4):139-174.
Ashkan Atry, Mats G. Hansson & Ulrik Kihlbom (2011). Gene Doping and the Responsibility of Bioethicists. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 5 (2):149 - 160.
Neil Levy (2009). Neuroethics: Ethics and the Sciences of the Mind. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):69-81.
Thomas Douglas (2008). Moral Enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.
Rebecca Roache (2008). Ethics, Speculation, and Values. NanoEthics 2 (3):317-327.
Nick Bostrom (2009). Cognitive Enhancement: Methods, Ethics, Regulatory Challenges. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (3):311-341.
Added to index2011-11-24
Total downloads10 ( #235,035 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #183,615 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?