« Picturing Philosophers: Portraits of Thinkers |
| Picturing Philosophers - National Portrait Gallery, London with Nigel Warburton »
Julian Savulescu argues that moral enahncement using biological techniques may hold the key for the future of humanity, faced with problems such as global warming, terrorism, and poverty.
Click on the link below to listen to this (23 mins 40 secs):
Julian Savulescu on Moral Enhancement
Posted at 09:09 AM | Permalink
I think one of the key problems of our time is the tremendous crisis related to Human Rights (one of the major basis of Liberal Democracy). They were conceived in a very particular moment of history, and they have, as a side effect, locked the concept of "what is to be human".
It's time to rethink the ideia of what is, after all, a human being. For that, it's imperative to face the new technologies and their impact on the so called "human nature"(whatever it really means). Then, it will be possible to have new grounds for human rights, as a possible path to face new moral dilemmas.
Brunello Stancioli |
May 20, 2011 at 11:15 PM
Thank you for one more fascinating interview. I share the questions you already raised, especially those related to autonomy and to how to get those unwilling to take the 'goodness-inducing' drugs to comply without running the risk of a totalitarian world-view. Given the limited space, I'd like to raise just a couple of further points on what Savulescu said.
1. It seems that one justification for the 'morality drugs program' that attempts to avoid an understanding of this view according to which people could be somehow forced to comply with such a policy, is that people are too weak-willed to act according to what they believe it's the right thing to do, therefore the drugs would only enable them to do what they already want to do. If the drugs may only be taken by those suffering from weakness of will then, in my opinion, this would drastically reduce the number of people who would qualify for the drugs program. Consequently, one crucial rationale for adopting such a program that Savulescu puts forward, that is, the aim of solving or almost solving, the enormous problems humanity confronts today, looks rather weakened as a result. It's hard to believe that our survival today and our failure in solving the great problems of world hunger or racism is mainly due to weakness of will.
2. In a more practical vein, given that those presumably taking the 'goodness drugs' are weak-willed people, wouldn't such drugs further exacerbate their weakness by making them dependent on them? Wouldn't we run the risk of turning the weak-willed amongst us into a mass of good-hearted, tolerant, generous, etc., mass of drug addicts?
Maria Antonietta Perna |
May 22, 2011 at 03:58 PM
I've often had the feeling that we humans are not very well adapted to our (urban) environment. Thanks to Julian Savulescu for articulating that.
It takes awareness, commitment, and discipline to morally improve oneself, and even with all three, there is a limited range to what we are capable of changing. Impulse control, how we spontaneously react to being wronged, irritated, etc. Although it seems that something like causal determinism is true, there is room for free will in this kind of character improvement, given the motivation.
Antidepressants can certainly facilitate that process. Thinking of Prozac as a moral enhancer...the idea fits my experience quite well.
Thanks for a thoughtful discussion.
Kelsey Elder |
May 24, 2011 at 05:25 AM
This would make a fascinating science fiction story...or an atrocious one!
July 09, 2011 at 11:44 PM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.
(URLs automatically linked.)
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address
Enter your email address:
Delivered by FeedBurner
Edmonds and Warburton: Philosophy Bites Again
Edmonds and Warburton: Philosophy Bites
Edmonds and Warburton: Philosophy Bites Back
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: The Basics
Nigel Warburton: A Little History of Philosophy
Nigel Warburton: Free Speech: A Very Short Introduction
Nigel Warburton: The Basics of Essay Writing
Nigel Warburton: Thinking from A to Z
Nigel Warburton: Erno Goldfinger: The Life of an Architect
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: The Essential Study Guide
Nigel Warburton: The Art Question
Nigel Warburton: Freedom: An Introduction with Readings
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: The Classics
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: Basic Readings
Nigel Warburton: Reading Political Philosophy: Machiavelli to Mill
David Edmonds: Philosophy Bites
Edmonds & Warburton: Philosophy Bites Back
Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates
The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics (Oxford Handbooks in Philosophy S.)
ed. Stephen Law: Philosophy for AS and A2
David Hockney, Bill Jay, Nigel Warburton: Brandt
ed. Sophie Howarth: Singular Images: Essays on Remarkable Photographs
ed. Julian Baggini: New British Philosophy
ed. Ben Rogers: Is Nothing Sacred?
Adam Nicolson: The Colour of Time: Garry Fabian Miller