Harvard University Program in Ethics and Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
J Med Ethics. 2010 Mar;36(3):148-51. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.033597.
Ingmar Persson and Julian Savulescu argue that non-traditional forms of cognitive enhancement (those involving genetic engineering or pharmaceuticals) present a serious threat to humanity, since the fruits of such enhancement, accelerated scientific progress, will give the morally corrupt minority of humanity new and more effective ways to cause great harm. And yet it is scientific progress, accelerated by non-traditional cognitive enhancement, which could allow us to dramatically morally enhance human beings, thereby eliminating, or at least reducing, the threat from the morally corrupt minority. I argue that this apparently intractable dilemma is less difficult to resolve than Persson and Savulescu suppose. Their analysis of non-traditional cognitive enhancement overstates the risks and undervalues the benefits that such enhancement might provide. Once the benefits are better described, it is clear that non-traditional cognitive enhancement could be the means of our survival, not of our destruction.
英格玛·佩尔森和朱利安·萨乌利塞斯库认为,非传统形式的认知增强(涉及基因工程或药物)对人类构成了严重威胁,因为这种增强的成果,即加速的科学进步,将赋予道德败坏的人类少数派新的、更有效的手段来造成巨大的伤害。然而,正是科学的进步,通过非传统的认知增强,使我们有可能显著地增强人类的道德,从而消除或至少减少来自道德败坏的少数派的威胁。我认为,这种明显的困境比佩尔森和萨乌利塞斯库所假设的要容易解决。他们对非传统认知增强的分析夸大了风险,低估了这种增强可能带来的好处。一旦更好地描述了这些好处,就很明显,非传统的认知增强可能是我们生存的手段,而不是我们毁灭的手段。