Neuroethics 7 (3):263-273 (2014)

Authors
Sigrid Sterckx
University of Ghent
Abstract
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 criteria used for determining whether an intervention is indeed moral enhancement. For example, some definitions are broad and include moral enhancement by any means, while other definitions focus only on moral enhancement by means of specific types of intervention. Moreover, for some definitions it suffices for an intervention to be aimed or intended to morally enhance a person, while other definitions only refer to ‘ moral enhancement ’ in relation to interventions that are actually effective. For all these differences in definitions we discuss some of their implications. This shows that definitions are significantly less descriptive and more normative than they are regularly portrayed to be. We therefore hope that the taxonomy developed in this paper and the comments on the implications for the normative debate of the variety of definitions will provide conceptual clarity in a complex and highly interesting debate
Keywords Moral enhancement  Moral bioenhancement  Definition  Conceptual analysis
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s12152-014-9205-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,668
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
Moral Enhancement and Freedom.John Harris - 2011 - Bioethics 25 (2):102-111.
Moral Enhancement.Thomas Douglas - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Moral Neuroenhancement.Brian D. Earp, Thomas Douglas & Julian Savulescu - 2017 - In L. Syd M. Johnson & Karen S. Rommelfanger (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Neuroethics. Routledge.

View all 19 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Moral Enhancement.Thomas Douglas - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3):228-245.
Moral Enhancement and Freedom.John Harris - 2011 - Bioethics 25 (2):102-111.
The Perils of Moral Enhancement.Aleksandar Dobrijevic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):104-110.
Should We Enhance Animals?S. Chan - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (11):678-683.
Moral Transhumanism: The Next Step.M. N. Tennison - 2012 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (4):405-416.
The Myth of the Moral Enhancement: Back to the Future?Veselin Mitrovic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (2):111-123.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-03-25

Total views
74 ( #125,134 of 2,331,431 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #121,864 of 2,331,431 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes