Moral Development in Early Childhood Is Key for Moral Enhancement

Christen, Markus; Narváez, Darcia

doi:10.1080/21507740.2012.721460

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The observation that school bullying (both perpetration and victimization) predicts aggression and violence later in life has prompted calls for early prevention efforts [ 38 , 39 ]. Although bullying per se is not the primary target of the moral bioenhancement debate, commentators have argued that “early childhood is probably the optimal starting point for moral enhancement” [ 40 , 41 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Attitudes Towards Moral Enhancement. Evidence that Means Matter Morally

Specker¹,

Schermer²,

Reiner

2017

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To gain insight into the reasons that the public may have for endorsing or eschewing pharmacological moral enhancement for themselves or for others, we used empirical tools to explore public attitudes towards these issues. Participants (N = 293) from the United States were recruited via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk and were randomly assigned to read one of several contrastive vignettes in which a 13-year-old child is described as bullying another student in school and then is offered an empathy-enhancing program. The empathy-enhancing program is described as either involving taking a pill or playing a video game on a daily basis for four weeks. In addition, participants were asked to imagine either their own child bullying another student at school, or their own child being bullied by another student. This resulted in a 2 × 2 between-subjects design. In an escalating series of morally challenging questions, we asked participants to rate their overall support for the program; whether they would support requiring participation; whether they would support requiring participation of children who are at higher risk to become bullies in the future; whether they would support requiring participation of all children or even the entire population; and whether they would be willing to participate in the program themselves. We found that people were significantly more troubled by pharmacological as opposed to non-pharmacological moral enhancement interventions. The results indicate that members of the public for the greater part oppose pharmacological moral bioenhancement, yet are open to non-biomedical means to attain moral enhancement. [248 words].Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12152-017-9340-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Attitudes Towards Moral Enhancement. Evidence that Means Matter Morally

Specker¹,

Schermer²,

Reiner

2017

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sprinkle approvingly cites Aristotle’s assertion that “traits virtuous in moderation might be vices in absence or excess” ([ 16 ]: 89). Moreover, Markus Christen and Darcia Narvaez argue that “moral character cannot emerge from a short-term intervention, but, as Aristotle advised, must be shaped with mentoring through multiple situations over time” ([ 32 ]: 26). Moreover, Sarah Chan and John Harris refer to a situation in which “serotonin-induced aversion to inflicting direct harm” might have stopped passengers from forcefully stopping a would-be hijacker ([ 51 ]: 131).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ethical desirability of moral bioenhancement: a review of reasons

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe debate on the ethical aspects of moral bioenhancement focuses on the desirability of using biomedical as opposed to traditional means to achieve moral betterment. The aim of this paper is to systematically review the ethical reasons presented in the literature for and against moral bioenhancement.DiscussionA review was performed and resulted in the inclusion of 85 articles. We classified the arguments used in those articles in the following six clusters: (1) why we (don’t) need moral bioenhancement, (2) it will (not) be possible to reach consensus on what moral bioenhancement should involve, (3) the feasibility of moral bioenhancement and the status of current scientific research, (4) means and processes of arriving at moral improvement matter ethically, (5) arguments related to the freedom, identity and autonomy of the individual, and (6) arguments related to social/group effects and dynamics. We discuss each argument separately, and assess the debate as a whole. First, there is little discussion on what distinguishes moral bioenhancement from treatment of pathological deficiencies in morality. Furthermore, remarkably little attention has been paid so far to the safety, risks and side-effects of moral enhancement, including the risk of identity changes. Finally, many authors overestimate the scientific as well as the practical feasibility of the interventions they discuss, rendering the debate too speculative.SummaryBased on our discussion of the arguments used in the debate on moral enhancement, and our assessment of this debate, we advocate a shift in focus. Instead of speculating about non-realistic hypothetical scenarios such as the genetic engineering of morality, or morally enhancing ‘the whole of humanity’, we call for a more focused debate on realistic options of biomedical treatment of moral pathologies and the concrete moral questions these treatments raise.

show abstract

“…Caregivers and children's relation to them play also an important role in moral development. 42,43 For example, in families with a higher level of emotional warmth, children are more altruistic. 44 Inconsistent child-rearing strategies leads to depression, anxiety, lowered social abilities, or aggression.…”

Section: Child Development and Moral Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DrugsandHugs: Stimulating Moral Dispositions as a Method of Moral Enhancement

Klincewicz

Frank²,

Sokólska

2018

Roy. Inst. Philos. Suppl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advocates of moral enhancement through pharmacological, genetic, or other direct interventions sometimes explicitly argue, or assume without argument, that traditional moral education and development is insufficient to bring about moral enhancement. Traditional moral education grounded in a Kohlbergian theory of moral development is indeed unsuitable for that task; however, the psychology of moral development and education has come a long way since then. Recent studies support the view that moral cognition is a higher-order process, unified at a functional level, and that a specific moral faculty does not exist. It is more likely that moral cognition involves a number of different mechanisms, each connected to other cognitive and affective processes. Taking this evidence into account, we propose a novel, empirically informed approach to moral development and education, in children and adults, which is based on a cognitive-affective approach to moral dispositions. This is an interpretative approach that derives from the cognitive-affective personality system (Mischel and Shoda, 1995). This conception individuates moral dispositions by reference to the cognitive and affective processes that realise them. Conceived of in this way, moral dispositions influence an agent's behaviour when they interact with situational factors, such as mood or social context. Understanding moral dispositions in this way lays the groundwork for proposing a range of indirect methods of moral enhancement, techniques that promise similar results as direct interventions whilst posing fewer risks.

show abstract

Moral Development in Early Childhood Is Key for Moral Enhancement

Cited by 11 publications

References 4 publications

Public Attitudes Towards Moral Enhancement. Evidence that Means Matter Morally

Public Attitudes Towards Moral Enhancement. Evidence that Means Matter Morally

The ethical desirability of moral bioenhancement: a review of reasons

DrugsandHugs: Stimulating Moral Dispositions as a Method of Moral Enhancement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About