Article Text
Papers
Neuroethics
Neuroenhancers, addiction and research ethics
Abstract
In their recent paper in this journal, Heinz and colleagues accuse proponents of cognitive enhancement of making two unjustified assumptions. The first of these is the assumption that neuroenhancing drugs will be safe; the second is that research into cognitive enhancement does not pose particular ethical problems. Heinz and colleagues argue that both these assumptions are false. Here, I argue that these assumptions are in fact correct, and that Heinz and colleagues themselves make several assumptions that undermine their argument. Neuroenhancement does raise several ethical concerns, but safety and research in this area pose no unique difficulties.
- Neuroethics
- Research Ethics
- Psychopharmacology
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Cognitive neuroenhancement: false assumptions in the ethical debate
- True and false concerns about neuroenhancement: a response to ‘Neuroenhancers, addiction and research ethics’, by D M Shaw
- Sugar addiction: is it real? A narrative review
- Neuroenhancing public health
- Neuropsychiatry of the basal ganglia
- Extrastriatal dopaminergic changes in Parkinson’s disease patients with impulse control disorders
- Smart drugs for cognitive enhancement: ethical and pragmatic considerations in the era of cosmetic neurology
- Medical use and combination drug therapy among US adult users of central nervous system stimulants: a cross-sectional analysis
- The use of methylphenidate among students: the future of enhancement?
- Parkinson disease and impulse control disorders: a review of clinical features, pathophysiology and management