Neuroethics and the Possible Types of Moral Enhancement

Shook, John R.

doi:10.1080/21507740.2012.712602

Cited by 63 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Burke, Page, & Cooper, 2015;Cameron, Mora, Leutscher, & Calarco, 2011;Cameron & Spreitzer, 2015;Spreitzer et al, 2012) might be reviewed in light of the clarity we have provided here to the notion of virtue. The emerging field of neuroethics possess interesting questions regarding moral enhancement (Shook, 2012), which may provide alternative avenues for understanding a virtue perspective as may the application of neuroscience and the proposed 'engineering of virtue' (Jotterand, 2011). We also urge a review of the virtue ethics literature in combination with the current organizational intervention literature to provide guidance on how best to select, refine, or develop virtue development interventions.…”

Section: Implications and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Virtue? Advancing the Conceptualization of Virtue to Inform Positive Organizational Inquiry

Newstead

Macklin

Dawkins

et al. 2018

AMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Implications and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Virtue? Advancing the Conceptualization of Virtue to Inform Positive Organizational Inquiry

Newstead

Macklin

Dawkins

et al. 2018

AMP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They violate some metaphysical or physical law. (Doubts regarding the possibility of MDNs more generally have also been raised by Ehni and Aurenque 2012, p. 232;Jotterand 2011;and Shook 2012. ) However, it is difficult to see how this charge could be sustained.…”

Section: Concern 2: Superficialitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this category are general skepticism about the possibility of moral improvement and concerns about whether we have adequate means for resolving disagreement and uncertainty about what character traits, motives and conduct are morally desirable and why. Debate regarding MDNs has elicited significant moral discussion on these points (Jotterand 2011;Schaefer 2011;Shook 2012;Wasserman 2011), but these concerns apply to traditional means of augmenting moral desirability as well as MDNs. Other concerns are general concerns about neuroenhancement that would apply to non-moral neuroenhancements as much as to MDNs.…”

Section: Other Defences Of Mdnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Morality of Moral Neuroenhancement

Douglas

2014

Handbook of Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This chapter reviews recent philosophical and neuroethical literature on the morality of moral neuroenhancements. It first briefly outlines the main moral arguments that have been made concerning moral status neuroenhancements. These are neurointerventions that would augment the moral status of human persons. It then surveys recent debate regarding moral desirability neuroenhancements: neurointerventions that augment that the moral desirability of human character traits, motives or conduct. This debate has contested, among other claims (i) Ingmar Persson and Julian Savulescu's contention that there is a moral imperative to pursue the development of moral desirability neuroenhancements, (ii) Thomas Douglas' claim that voluntarily undergoing moral desirability neuroenhancements would often be morally permissible, and (iii) David DeGrazia's claim that moral desirability neuroenhancements would often be morally desirable. The chapter discusses a number of concerns that have been raised regarding moral desirability neuroenhancements, including concerns that they would restrict freedom, would produce only a superficial kind of moral improvement, would rely on technologies that are liable to be misused, and would frequently misfire, resulting in moral deterioration rather than moral improvement.

show abstract

“…Moral enhancement, outlined in the well-elaborated typology by John Shook (2012), is the most recent strain in the enhancement debate that unfolded in the last decade-but the ideal of "becoming a morally better person" is probably among the oldest topics in practical philosophy and pedagogy. However, the topic of "moral enhancement" offers the new idea that knowledge of the biological foundation of human moral behavior may allow for interventions into the "neuronal infrastructure" of morality in order to improve the behavior of people or, at least, to diminish some forms of evil that result, for example, from prefrontal lesions (Sobhani and Bechara 2011).…”

Section: Markus Christen University Of Zürich and University Of Notrmentioning

confidence: 99%