Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 8 (2014)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Research into cognitive biases that impair human judgment has mostly been applied to the area of economic decision-making. Ethical decision-making has been comparatively neglected. Since ethical decisions often involve very high individual as well as collective stakes, analyzing how cognitive biases affect them can be expected to yield important results. In this theoretical article, we consider the ethical debate about cognitive enhancement and suggest a number of cognitive biases that are likely to affect moral intuitions and judgments about CE: status quo bias, loss aversion, risk aversion, omission bias, scope insensitivity, nature bias, and optimistic bias. We find that there are more well-documented biases that are likely to cause irrational aversion to CE than biases in the opposite direction. This suggests that common attitudes about CE are predominantly negatively biased. Within this new perspective, we hope that subsequent research will be able to elaborate this hypothesis and develop effective de-biasing techniques that can help increase the rationality of the public CE debate and thus improve our ethical decision-making.
|
Keywords | Brain function augmentation attitudes cognitive bias de-biasing moral intuitions rationality cognitive enhancement |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00195 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman - 1974 - Science 185 (4157):1124-1131.
Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People.John Harris - 2007 - Princeton University Press.
Choices, Values, and Frames.Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky (eds.) - 2000 - Cambridge University Press.
View all 27 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Imaginative Value Sensitive Design: Using Moral Imagination Theory to Inform Responsible Technology Design.Steven Umbrello - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (2):575-595.
Human Enhancement: Enhancing Health or Harnessing Happiness?Bjørn Hofmann - 2019 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 16 (1):87-98.
Why is Cognitive Enhancement Deemed Unacceptable? The Role of Fairness, Deservingness, and Hollow Achievements.Nadira S. Faber, Julian Savulescu & Thomas Douglas - 2016 - Frontiers in Psychology 7.
Cognitive Enhancement and Motivation Enhancement: An Empirical Comparison of Intuitive Judgments.Nadira S. Faber, Thomas Douglas, Felix Heise & Miles Hewstone - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 6 (1):18-20.
Pills or Push-Ups? Effectiveness and Public Perception of Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Cognitive Enhancement.Lucius Caviola & Nadira S. Faber - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
View all 11 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Analytics
Added to PP index
2015-02-28
Total views
73 ( #156,091 of 2,498,570 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #282,166 of 2,498,570 )
2015-02-28
Total views
73 ( #156,091 of 2,498,570 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #282,166 of 2,498,570 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads