Affiliation:
1. University of Granada ( Spain )
Abstract
Abstract
Utilitarianism has been able to respond to many of the objections raised against it by undertaking a major revision of its theory. Basically, this consisted of recognising that its early normative propositions were only viable for agents very different from flesh-and-blood humans. They then deduced that, given human limitations, it was most useful for everyone if moral agents did not behave as utilitarians and habitually followed certain rules. Important recent advances in neurotechnology suggest that some of these human limitations can be overcome. In this article, after presenting some possible neuro-enhancements, we seek to answer the questions, first, of whether they should be accepted by a utilitarian ethic and, second, if accepted, to what extent they would invalidate the revision that allowed them to escape the objections.
Subject
Health Policy,Philosophy,Education
Reference80 articles.
1. ABU-AKEL, A. et al. (2015): Oxytocin increases empathy to pain when adopting the other – but not the self-perspective. In: Social Neuroscience, 10(1), pp. 7–15.10.1080/17470919.2014.948637
2. ADAMS, R. M. (1976): Motive utilitarianism. In: Journal of Philosophy, 73(14), pp. 467–481.10.2307/2025783
3. AKITSUKI, Y. & DECETY, J. (2009): Social context and perceived agency affects empathy for pain: An event-related fMRI investigation. In: Neuroimage, 47(2), pp. 722–734.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.04.091
4. BALES, R. E. (1971): Act-utilitarianism: Account of right making characteristics or decision-making procedure? In: American Philosophical Quarterly, 8(3), pp. 257–265.
5. BARRAZA, J. (2010): The physiology of empathy: Living oxytocin to empathic responding, Dissertation. Claremont Graduate University, Proquest.
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