Abstract
AbstractBioconservative bioethicists (e.g., Kass, 2002, Human Dignity and Bioethics, 297–331, 2008; Sandel, 2007; Fukuyama, 2003) offer various kinds of philosophical arguments against cognitive enhancement—i.e., the use of medicine and technology to make ourselves “better than well” as opposed to merely treating pathologies. Two notable such bioconservative arguments appeal to ideas about (1) the value of achievement, and (2) authenticity. It is shown here that even if these arguments from achievement and authenticity cut ice against specifically pharmacologically driven cognitive enhancement, they do not extend over to an increasingly viable form of technological cognitive enhancement – namely, cognitive enhancement via augmented reality. An important result is that AR-driven cognitive enhancement aimed at boosting performance in certain cognitive tasks might offer an interesting kind of “sweet spot” for proponents of cognitive enhancement, allowing us to pursue many of the goals of enhancement advocates without running into some of the most prominent objections from bioconservative philosophers.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference47 articles.
1. Azevedo, M. A. (2016). The misfortunes of moral enhancement. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 41(5), 461–479.
2. Billinghurst, M. (2002). Augmented reality in education. New Horizons for Learning, 12(5), 1–5.
3. Bolt, L. L. E. (2007). True to oneself? Broad and narrow ideas on authenticity in the enhancement debate. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 28(4), 285–300.
4. Bradford, G. (2013). The value of achievements. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 94(2), 204–224.
5. Bradford, G. (2015). Achievement. Oxford University Press.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献