Moral Enhancement, Acquired Virtue, and Theism: A Response to Brummett and Crutchfield

Bioethics 1 (Online First):1-8 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Recently, Brummett and Crutchfield advanced two critiques of theists who object to moral enhancement. First, a conceptual critique: theists who oppose moral enhancement commonly do so because virtue is thought to be acquired only via a special kind of process. Enhancement does not involve such processes. Hence, enhancement cannot produce virtue. Yet theists also commonly claim that God is perfectly virtuous and not subject to processes. If virtue requires a process and God is perfectly virtuous without a process, however, then theists contradict themselves. Second, a moral critique: theists who reject moral enhancement are selfish, since accepting moral enhancement would (allegedly) reduce widespread suffering. Theists often condemn selfishness, however. By condemning selfishness and (simultaneously) rejecting enhancement, therefore, theists contradict themselves yet again. We argue that both critiques fail. Both substantially misrepresent their target. First, Brummett and Crutchfield confuse metaphysical enhancement (attempts to alter human nature) with moral enhancement (attempts to become better human beings). Authors that Brummett and Crutchfield cite object to the former, not the latter. Second, both conceptual and moral critiques overlook the many resources within theistic traditions that can quickly resolve relevant (alleged) contradictions. The conceptual critique, for example, misrepresents both common views held among theists (regarding God’s virtue) and the ways in which virtue may be acquired. Similarly, the moral critique mischaracterizes the relationship commonly posited by theists between enhancement and agency. By attending to what theists actually claim—rather than relying on caricatures—it becomes clear that each of Brummett and Crutchfield’s critiques fail.

Similar books and articles

Moral Enhancement and the Public Good.Parker Crutchfield - 2021 - New York, NY, USA: Routledge.
Moral Enhancement Can Kill.Parker Crutchfield - 2018 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 43 (5):568-584.
Moral Normative Force and Clinical Ethics Expertise.Parker Crutchfield - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (11):89-91.
How Would We Know If Moral Enhancement Had Occurred?Garry Young - 2018 - Journal of Speculative Philosophy 32 (4):587-606.
Moral enhancement.Thomas Douglas - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.
The perils of moral enhancement.Aleksandar Dobrijevic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):104-110.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-08-01

Downloads
300 (#64,068)

6 months
119 (#28,666)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Nicholas Colgrove
Augusta University
Derek McAllister
Towson University
J. Burke Rea
Eastern University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Virtue Ethics.Rosalind Hursthouse & Glen Pettigrove - 2022 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics.Roger Crisp (ed.) - 2005 - Cambridge University Press.
The Devil in the Details.Nicholas Colgrove - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):18-20.
A Thomistic appraisal of human enhancement technologies.Jason T. Eberl - 2014 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 35 (4):289-310.

View all 8 references / Add more references