Citations of work:

Thomas Douglas (2013). Moral Enhancement Via Direct Emotion Modulation: A Reply to John Harris.

25 found
Order:
Are we missing citations?

PhilPapers citations & references are currently in beta testing. We expect to add many more in the future.

Meanwhile, you can use our bibliography tool to import references for this or another work.

Or you can directly add citations for the above work:

Search for work by author name and title
Add directly by record ID

  1. Would Moral Enhancement Limit Freedom?Antonio Diéguez & Carissa Véliz - forthcoming - Topoi:1-8.
    The proposal of moral enhancement as a valuable means to face the environmental, technological and social challenges that threaten the future of humanity has been criticized by a number of authors. One of the main criticisms has been that moral enhancement would diminish our freedom. It has been said that moral enhancement would lead enhanced people to lose their ‘freedom to fall’, that is, it would prevent them from being able to decide to carry out some morally bad actions, and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  7
    Moral Bioenhancement Through Memory-Editing: A Risk for Identity and Authenticity?Andrea Lavazza - forthcoming - Topoi:1-13.
    Moral bioenhancement is the attempt to improve human behavioral dispositions, especially in relation to the great ethical challenges of our age. To this end, scientists have hypothesised new molecules or even permanent changes in the genetic makeup to achieve such moral bioenhancement. The philosophical debate has focused on the permissibility and desirability of that enhancement and the possibility of making it mandatory, given the positive result that would follow. However, there might be another way to enhance the overall moral behavior (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  2
    Moral Enhancement and the Good Life.Hazem Zohny - forthcoming - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  2
    Genome Editing for Involuntary Moral Enhancement.Vojin Rakić - 2019 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 28 (1):46-54.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Should We Biochemically Enhance Sexual Fidelity?Robbie Arrell - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:389-414.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  6
    Doing Good, Choosing Freely: How Moral Enhancement Can Be Compatible with Individual Freedom.Joshua M. Brostoff - 2018 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27 (4):698-709.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  5
    The New Ethics of Neuroethics.Tom Buller - 2018 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27 (4):558-565.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8.  33
    The Trouble With Moral Enhancement.Inmaculada de Melo-Martín - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:19-33.
    Proponents of moral enhancement believe that we should pursue and apply biotechnological means to morally enhance human beings, as failing to do so is likely to lead to humanity's demise. Unsurprisingly, these proposals have generated a substantial amount of debate about the moral permissibility of using such interventions. Here I put aside concerns about the permissibility of moral enhancement and focus on the conceptual and evidentiary grounds for the moral enhancement project. I argue that such grounds are quite precarious.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  7
    Psychedelic Moral Enhancement.Brian D. Earp - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:415-439.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  9
    Moral Enhancement as a Collective Action Problem.Walter Glannon - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:59-85.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  17
    Direct Brain Interventions, Changing Values and the Argument From Objectification – a Reply to Elizabeth Shaw.Sebastian Holmen - 2018 - Neuroethics 11 (2):217-227.
    This paper critically discusses the argument from objectification – as recently presented by Elizabeth Shaw – against mandatory direct brain interventions targeting criminal offenders’ values as part of rehabilitative or reformative schemes. Shaw contends that such DBIs would objectify offenders because a DBI “excludes offenders by portraying them as a group to whom we need not listen” and “implies that offenders are radically defective with regard to one of the most fundamental aspects of their agency”. To ensure that offenders are (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  1
    Is Moral Enhancement a Right, or a Threat to Rights?John R. Shook - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:209-231.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  4
    Kantian Challenges for the Bioenhancement of Moral Autonomy.Anna Frammartino Wilks - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 83:121-143.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  5
    Would We Even Know Moral Bioenhancement If We Saw It?Harris Wiseman - 2017 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 26 (3):398-410.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  57
    Moral Enhancement: Do Means Matter Morally?Farah Focquaert & Maartje Schermer - 2015 - Neuroethics 8 (2):139-151.
    One of the reasons why moral enhancement may be controversial, is because the advantages of moral enhancement may fall upon society rather than on those who are enhanced. If directed at individuals with certain counter-moral traits it may have direct societal benefits by lowering immoral behavior and increasing public safety, but it is not directly clear if this also benefits the individual in question. In this paper, we will discuss what we consider to be moral enhancement, how different means may (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  16. The Ethics of Human Enhancement.Alberto Giubilini & Sagar Sanyal - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (4):233-243.
    Ethical debate surrounding human enhancement, especially by biotechnological means, has burgeoned since the turn of the century. Issues discussed include whether specific types of enhancement are permissible or even obligatory, whether they are likely to produce a net good for individuals and for society, and whether there is something intrinsically wrong in playing God with human nature. We characterize the main camps on the issue, identifying three main positions: permissive, restrictive and conservative positions. We present the major sub-debates and lines (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  17.  65
    Enhancing Moral Conformity and Enhancing Moral Worth.Thomas Douglas - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (1):75-91.
    It is plausible that we have moral reasons to become better at conforming to our moral reasons. However, it is not always clear what means to greater moral conformity we should adopt. John Harris has recently argued that we have reason to adopt traditional, deliberative means in preference to means that alter our affective or conative states directly—that is, without engaging our deliberative faculties. One of Harris’ concerns about direct means is that they would produce only a superficial kind of (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  18.  28
    Taking Liberties with Free Fall.J. Harris - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (6):371-374.
    In his ‘Moral Enhancement, Freedom, and What We Value in Moral Behaviour’,1 David DeGrazia sets out to defend moral bioenhancement from a number of critics, me prominently among them. Here he sets out his stall: "Many scholars doubt what I assert: that there is nothing inherently wrong with MB. Some doubt this on the basis of a conviction that there is something inherently wrong with biomedical enhancement technologies in general. Chief among their objections are the charges that biomedical enhancement is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  19.  34
    Voluntary Moral Enhancement and the Survival-at-Any-Cost Bias.V. Raki - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (4):246-250.
    I discuss the argument of Persson and Savulescu that moral enhancement ought to accompany cognitive enhancement, as well as briefly addressing critiques of this argument, notably by John Harris. I argue that Harris, who believes that cognitive enhancement is largely sufficient for making us behave more morally, might be disposing too easily of the great quandary of our moral existence: the gap between what we do and what we believe is morally right to do. In that regard, Persson and Savulescu's (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  20.  55
    On Defining Moral Enhancement: A Clarificatory Taxonomy.Kasper Raus, Farah Focquaert, Maartje Schermer, Jona Specker & Sigrid Sterckx - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (3):263-273.
    Recently there has been some discussion concerning a particular type of enhancement, namely ‘ moral enhancement ’. However, there is no consensus on what precisely constitutes moral enhancement, and as a result the concept is used and defined in a wide variety of ways. In this article, we develop a clarificatory taxonomy of these definitions and we identify the criteria that are used to delineate the concept. We think that the current definitions can be distinguished from each other by the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  21.  38
    Moral Enhancement and Self-Subversion Objections.Kelly Sorensen - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (3):275-286.
    Some say moral bioenhancements are urgent and necessary; others say they are misguided or simply will not work. I examine a class of arguments claiming that moral bioenhancements are problematic because they are self-subverting. On this view, trying to make oneself or others more moral, at least through certain means, can itself be immoral, or at least worse than the alternatives. The thought here is that moral enhancements might fail not for biological reasons, but for specifically morally self-referential reasons. I (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  47
    Egalitarianism and Moral Bioenhancement.Robert Sparrow - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (4):20-28.
    A number of philosophers working in applied ethics and bioethics are now earnestly debating the ethics of what they term “moral bioenhancement.” I argue that the society-wide program of biological manipulations required to achieve the purported goals of moral bioenhancement would necessarily implicate the state in a controversial moral perfectionism. Moreover, the prospect of being able to reliably identify some people as, by biological constitution, significantly and consistently more moral than others would seem to pose a profound challenge to egalitarian (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  23.  16
    Risk, Russian-Roulette and Lotteries: Persson and Savulescu on Moral Enhancement. [REVIEW]Darryl Gunson & Hugh McLachlan - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (4):877-884.
    The literature concerning the possibility and desirability of using new pharmacological and possible future genetic techniques to enhance human characteristics is well-established and the debates follow some well-known argumentative patterns. However, one argument in particular stands out and demands attention. This is the attempt to tie the moral necessity of moral enhancement to the hypothesised risks that allowing cognitive enhancement will bring. According to Persson and Savulescu, cognitive enhancement should occur only if the risks they think it to poses are (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  49
    The Thorny and Arduous Path of Moral Progress.Chris Zarpentine - 2013 - Neuroethics 6 (1):141-153.
    The moral enhancement of humans by biological or genetic means has recently been urged as a response to the pressing concerns facing human civilization. In this paper, I argue that proponents of biological moral enhancement have misrepresented the facts of human moral psychology. As a result, the likely effectiveness of traditional methods of moral enhancement has been underestimated, relative to biological or genetic means. I review arguments in favor of biological moral enhancement and argue that the complexity of moral psychology (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  25.  54
    What It's Like to Be Good.John Harris - 2012 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (3):293-305.
    In this issue of CQ we introduce a new feature, in which noted bioethicists are invited to reflect on vital current issues. Our first invitee, John Harris, will subsequently assume editorship of this section.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations