Suppr超能文献

人们如何看待人类的技术增强?一项在价值观、科学主义世界观和公认的人文主义版本背景下使用技术增强问卷的初步研究。

What do people think about technological enhancements of human beings? An introductory study using the Technological Enhancements Questionnaire in the context of values, the scientistic worldview, and the accepted versions of humanism.

作者信息

Stefański Daniel, Jach Łukasz

机构信息

University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

出版信息

Curr Issues Personal Psychol. 2021 Nov 1;10(1):71-84. doi: 10.5114/cipp.2021.110061. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Rapid development of technologies increases the possibility of technological enhancements of human beings, e.g., in their cognitive skills or physical fitness. Attitudes towards such enhancements may result in their social acceptance or rejection.

PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE

One hundred and thirty-nine young Polish adults participated in the study. Participants completed the designed Technological Enhancements Questionnaire (TEQ) and questionnaires to measure values, the scientistic worldview, and the accepted versions of humanism.

RESULTS

The study showed a one-dimensional TEQ structure and its satisfactory reliability. Attitudes towards technological enhancements correlated positively with achievement, self-direction in thought, power over resources, the scientistic worldview, and the evolutionary version of humanism. They also correlated negatively with tradition and the liberal version of humanism.

CONCLUSIONS

The TEQ questionnaire is a short, reliable tool to measure attitudes towards technological enhancements. This preliminary study provided some significant results, but future work to validate the questionnaire is needed.

摘要

背景

技术的快速发展增加了对人类进行技术增强的可能性,例如在认知技能或身体素质方面。对这种增强的态度可能导致其被社会接受或拒绝。

参与者与过程

139名波兰年轻成年人参与了这项研究。参与者完成了设计好的技术增强问卷(TEQ)以及用于测量价值观、科学主义世界观和被认可的人文主义版本的问卷。

结果

研究显示了TEQ的一维结构及其令人满意的信度。对技术增强的态度与成就、思维中的自我导向、对资源的掌控力、科学主义世界观以及人文主义的进化版本呈正相关。它们也与传统和人文主义的自由主义版本呈负相关。

结论

TEQ问卷是一种简短、可靠的工具,用于测量对技术增强的态度。这项初步研究提供了一些重要结果,但需要未来的工作来验证该问卷。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

4
The limits of the treatment-enhancement distinction as a guide to public policy.
Bioethics. 2017 Oct;31(8):608-615. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12377.
5
Cognitive Enhancement: Treating or Cheating?
Semin Pediatr Neurol. 2015 Sep;22(3):172-6. doi: 10.1016/j.spen.2015.05.003. Epub 2015 May 13.
6
Attitudes toward pharmacological cognitive enhancement-a review.对药物性认知增强的态度——一项综述
Front Syst Neurosci. 2014 Apr 17;8:53. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00053. eCollection 2014.
9
Cognitive enhancement: methods, ethics, regulatory challenges.认知增强:方法、伦理与监管挑战
Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Sep;15(3):311-41. doi: 10.1007/s11948-009-9142-5. Epub 2009 Jun 19.
10
Normal functioning and the treatment-enhancement distinction.正常功能与治疗-增强的区分
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2000 Summer;9(3):309-22. doi: 10.1017/s0963180100903037.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验