Does the cognitive enhancement debate call for a renewal of the deliberative role of bioethics?

Forlini, Cynthia and Racine, Eric (2013). Does the cognitive enhancement debate call for a renewal of the deliberative role of bioethics?. In Elisabeth Hildt and Andreas G. Franke (Ed.), Cognitive Enhancement: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 173-186) Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Netherlands. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6253-4_15


Author Forlini, Cynthia
Racine, Eric
Title of chapter Does the cognitive enhancement debate call for a renewal of the deliberative role of bioethics?
Title of book Cognitive Enhancement: An Interdisciplinary Perspective
Place of Publication Dordrecht, Netherlands
Publisher Springer Netherlands
Publication Year 2013
Sub-type Chapter in reference work, encyclopaedia, manual or handbook
DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-6253-4_15
Open Access Status
Series Trends in Augmentation of Human Performance
ISBN 9789400762527
9789400762534
ISSN 2213-1310
Editor Elisabeth Hildt
Andreas G. Franke
Volume number 1
Chapter number 15
Start page 173
End page 186
Total pages 14
Total chapters 21
Language eng
Formatted Abstract/Summary
Discourse on the issues related to the cognitive enhancement (CE) of healthy individuals using prescription medication has been firmly grounded in academia. Results from an emerging body of research examining the perspectives of non-academic stakeholders through surveys and focus groups have added experiential facets to the ethics debate around CE that, when synthesized, can yield important messages that further complement and diverge from academic discussions. We examined published literature on stakeholder perspectives and found conclusions that diverged from current academic literature. Three points of contention were found: (1) the discussion of safety and efficacy as a rate-limiting step in the progression of CE both practically and ethically; (2) the perception of both high and low prevalence in university students and consequences of the perceived prevalence; and (3) the ambivalence and ambiguity on the acceptability of CE and the progression of the ethics debate around it. These three points of contention suggest that the ethics debate around CE in academic and in stakeholder perspectives may be running on separate parallel tracks. We propose that the discipline of bioethics needs to reaffirm its role as a meeting place for the traditional academic ethics debate on CE and the more experientially-based approach of stakeholders to enrich future deliberation.
Keyword Cognitive enhancement
Public discourse
Stakeholders
Bioethics
Policy-making
Q-Index Code BX
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Book Chapter
Collection: UQ Centre for Clinical Research Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Mon, 30 Mar 2015, 10:19:06 EST by Cynthia Forlini on behalf of UQ Centre for Clinical Research