Concerns that people would be disinclined to voluntarily undergo moral enhancement have led to suggestions that an incentivised programme should be introduced to encourage participation. This paper argues that, while such measures do not necessarily result in coercion or undue inducement (issues with which one may typically associate the use of incentives in general), the use of incentives for this purpose may present a taboo trade-off. This is due to empirical research suggesting that those characteristics likely to be affected by moral enhancement are often perceived as fundamental to the self; therefore, any attempt to put a price on such traits would likely be deemed morally unacceptable by those who hold this view. A better approach to address the possible lack of participation may be to instead invest in alternative marketing strategies and remove incentives altogether.
- Behaviour Modification
- Public Policy
- Moral Psychology
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Reply to commentators on Unfit for the Future
- Technological moral enhancement or traditional moral progress? Why not both?
- ‘My child will never initiate Ultimate Harm’: an argument against moral enhancement
- Amoral enhancement
- Voluntary moral enhancement and the survival-at-any-cost bias
- Why is it possible to enhance moral status and why doing so is wrong?
- The perils of failing to enhance: a response to Persson and Savulescu
- Why we can't really say what post-persons are
- Freedom and moral enhancement
- On not taking men as they are: reflections on moral bioenhancement