Converging Technologies: A Critical Analysis of Cognitive Enhancement for Public Policy Application [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3):1017-1038 (2013)
|Abstract||This paper investigates cognitive enhancement, specifically biological cognitive enhancement (BCE), as a converging technology, and its implications for public policy. With an increasing rate of technological advancements, the legal, social, and economic frameworks lag behind the scientific advancements that they support. This lag poses significant challenges for policymakers if it is not dealt with sufficiently within the right analytical context. Therefore, the driving question behind this paper is, “What contingencies inform the advancement of biological cognitive enhancement, and what would society look like under this set of assumptions?” The paper is divided into five components: (1) defining the current policy context for BCEs, (2) analyzing the current social and economic outcomes to BCEs, (3) investigating the context of cost-benefit arguments in relation to BCEs, (4) proposing an analytical model for evaluating contingencies for BCE development, and (5) evaluating a simulated policy, social, technological, and economic context given the contingencies. In order to manage the risk and uncertainty inherent in technological change, BCEs’ drivers must be scrutinized and evaluated|
|Keywords||Cognitive enhancement Biological cognitive enhancement Technology change Public values Technology governance Risk management|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John Basl (2010). State Neutrality and the Ethics of Human Enhancement Technologies. AJOB 1 (2):41-48.
Nick Bostrom (2009). Cognitive Enhancement: Methods, Ethics, Regulatory Challenges. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (3):311-341.
S. M. Outram & E. Racine (2011). Developing Public Health Approaches to Cognitive Enhancement: An Analysis of Current Reports. Public Health Ethics 4 (1):93-105.
Veljko Dubljević (2013). Cognitive Enhancement, Rational Choice and Justification. Neuroethics 6 (1):179-187.
Jonathan Wolff (2009). Cognitive Disability in a Society of Equals. Metaphilosophy 40 (3-4):402-415.
Byron Chell (1988). But Murderers Can Have All the Children They Want: Surrogacy and Public Policy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 9 (1).
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.
Catherine Slade (2011). Public Value Mapping of Equity in Emerging Nanomedicine. Minerva 49 (1):71-86.
Nick Bostrom (forthcoming). Smart Policy: Cognitive Enhancement and the Public Interest. In Julian Savulescu, Ruud ter Muelen & Guy Kahane (eds.), Enhancing Human Capabilities. Wiley-Blackwell.
Patrick Lin & Fritz Allhoff (2006). Nanoethics and Human Enhancement: A Critical Evaluation of Recent Arguments. Nanotechnology Perceptions 2:47-52.
Arianna Ferrari, Christopher Coenen & Armin Grunwald (2012). Visions and Ethics in Current Discourse on Human Enhancement. Nanoethics 6 (3):215-229.
Kristin Shrader‐Frechette (1992). Science, Democracy, and Public Policy. Critical Review 6 (2-3):255-264.
C. Elliott (2011). Enhancement Technologies and the Modern Self. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (4):364-374.
Franklin G. Miller & Howard Brody (2005). Enhancement Technologies and Professional Integrity. American Journal of Bioethics 5 (3):15 – 17.
Added to index2012-10-11
Total downloads2 ( #247,893 of 751,702 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,163 of 751,702 )
How can I increase my downloads?