Neuroenhancers, addiction and research ethics

Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (10):605-608 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In their recent paper in this journal, Heinz and colleagues accuse proponents of cognitive enhancement of making two unjustified assumptions. The first of these is the assumption that neuroenhancing drugs will be safe; the second is that research into cognitive enhancement does not pose particular ethical problems. Heinz and colleagues argue that both these assumptions are false. Here, I argue that these assumptions are in fact correct, and that Heinz and colleagues themselves make several assumptions that undermine their argument. Neuroenhancement does raise several ethical concerns, but safety and research in this area pose no unique difficulties.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,809

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-08-12

Downloads
93 (#225,561)

6 months
17 (#171,266)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David M. Shaw
University of Basel

Citations of this work

Neuroenhancing public health.David Shaw - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (6):389-391.
Neuroenhancing Public Health.David Shaw - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics (6):2012-101300.

Add more citations