科研之友
微信
新浪微博
Facebook
分享链接
摘要
Definition of the problem Research in medical ethics focusing on neuroenhancement (NE) often turns to the question, to what extent individuals or the community could be harmed through NE. Problems with fairness, a feared change in the idea of man, or the danger of an unwanted but subtle change in society are discussed. Concerning individual risks, this usually remains a matter of a subjective cost-benefit analysis, because of the supposed gain of self-determination and personal responsibility. In the NE debate, there are few papers that highlight the motives for using NE from a psychodynamic view. The primary goal of this paper is to study and analyze potential motives. Its aim is to contribute a new perspective on self-determination in the context of NE. Arguments Psychological arguments that complicate a forward-looking, subjective evaluation of the pros and cons for psychodynamic reasons are discussed. We want to sensitize for psychological risks and consequences of NE. It is argued in what way the use of NE technologies could strongly influence a personality and, therefore, could impair the experience of self-efficacy. Conclusion This questions a central assumption of the liberal position-that individuals can decide freely and self-reflecting whether to use NE or not.
- 出版日期2012-3
