In Akira Akabayashi (ed.), The Future of Bioethics: International Dialogues. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2014)

Julian Savulescu
Oxford University
Thomas Douglas
Oxford University
Ingmar Persson
Oxford University
Much disease and disability is the result of lifestyle behaviours. For example, the contribution of imprudence in the form of smoking, poor diet, sedentary lifestyle, and drug and alcohol abuse to ill-health is now well established. More importantly, some of the greatest challenges facing humanity as a whole – climate change, terrorism, global poverty, depletion of resources, abuse of children, overpopulation – are the result of human behaviour. In this chapter, we will explore the possibility of using advances in the cognitive sciences to develop strategies to intentionally manipulate human motivation and behaviour. While our arguments apply also to improving prudential motivation and behaviour in relation to health, we will focus on the more controversial instance: the deliberate targeted use of biomedicine to improve moral motivation and behaviour. We do this because the challenge of improving human morality is arguably the most important issue facing humankind (Persson and Savulescu, forthcoming). We will ask whether using the knowledge from the biological and cognitive sciences to influence motivation and behaviour erodes autonomy and, if so, whether this makes it wrong.
Keywords behaviour modification  autonomy  moral motivation
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

Ethics and Intuitions.Peter Singer - 2005 - The Journal of Ethics 9 (3-4):331-352.
On Liberty.John Stuart Mill - 1859 - Broadview Press.
Moral Enhancement and Freedom.John Harris - 2011 - Bioethics 25 (2):102-111.

View all 16 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.
Can Self-Validating Neuroenhancement Be Autonomous?Jukka Varelius - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 23 (1):51-59.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Genetic Modification and Genetic Determinism.David B. Resnik & Daniel B. Vorhaus - 2006 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 1:9.
An Ethics for Behaviour Modification.Hugo Meynell - 1981 - New Blackfriars 62 (731):217-231.
Biological Autonomy.Attila Grandpierre & Menas Kafatos - 2012 - Philosophy Study 2 (9):631-649.
Deviant Sexual Behaviour: Modification and Assessment.R. C. Lyle - 1975 - Journal of Medical Ethics 1 (4):197-198.
Autonomy, Consent and the Law.Sheila McLean - 2009 - Routledge-Cavendish.
Ethics Consultation and Autonomy.Jukka Varelius - 2008 - Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (1):65-76.
The Challenge of Biological Determinism.Rosemary Rodd - 1987 - Philosophy 62 (239):84 - 93.


Added to PP index

Total views
364 ( #28,674 of 2,519,807 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #37,728 of 2,519,807 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes