Advertisement

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 303–309 | Cite as

Incentivized goodness

  • Vojin Rakić
Scientific Contribution

Abstract

It will be argued that humans have a rational self-interest in voluntarily opting to subject themselves to moral bioenhancement. This interest is based on the fact that goodness appears to be conducive to happiness. Those who understand that will be more inclined to opt for safe and effective moral bioenhancement technologies that have the potential to augment our motivation to become better. The more people decide to follow this path, the likelier it is that states will adopt suitable policies that incentivize moral bioenhancement. Hence, goodness, happiness and state incentivized moral bioenhancement can operate in a circularly supportive fashion.

Keywords

Moral bioenhancement Incentivized goodness Happiness Freedom Moral reflection Ultimate harm Self-interest State incentives Circularly supportive mechanism 

References

  1. Anik Lalin, Aknin Lara, B., I. Norton Michael, and W. Dunn Elizabeth. 2009. Feeling good about giving: The benefits (and costs) of self-interested charitable behavior. Harvard Business School Working Paper.Google Scholar
  2. Baumeister, R. F., E. J. Masicampo, and C. N. DeWall. 2009. Prosocial benefits of feeling free: Disbelief in free will increases agression and reduces helpfulness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35:260–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Douglas, T. 2008. Moral enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (3): 228–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dunn, Elizabeth W., B. Aknin Lara, and I. Norton Michael. 2008. Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science 319: 1687–1688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Isen, Alice M., and F. Levin Paula. 1972. Effect of feeling good on helping: Cookies and kindness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 21 (3): 384–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lau, H. C., R. D. Rogers, and R. E. Passingham. 2007. Manipulating the experienced onset of intention after action execution. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19: 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Libet, B. 1986. Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 8: 529–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Libet, B., C. A. Gleason, E. W. Wright, and D. K. Pearl. 1983. Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential). The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain 106: 623–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Persson, I., and J. Savulescu. 2008. The perils of cognitive enhancement and the urgent imperative to enhance the moral character of humanity. Journal of Applied Philosophy 25: 162–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Persson, I., and J. Savulescu. 2012. Unfit for the future: The Need for Moral Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford Univerity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Persson, I., and J. Savulescu. 2014. Should moral bioenhancement be compulsory? Reply to Vojin Rakic. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (4): 251–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rakić, V. 2014. Voluntary moral enhancement and the survival-at-any-cost bias. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (4): 246–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rakić, V. 2015. We must create beings with moral standing superior to our own. Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics 24 (1): 58–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rakić, V. 2017a. Moral bioenhancement and free will: Continuing the debate. Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics 26 (3): 384–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rakić, V. 2017b. Compulsory administration of oxytocin does not result in genuine moral enhancement. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (3): 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rigoni, D., S. Kühn, G. Gaudino, G. Sartori, and M. Brass. 2012b. Reducing self-control by weakening belief in free will. Consciousness and Cognition 21: 1482–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rigoni, D., S. Kühn, G. Sartori, and M. Brass. 2012a. Inducing disbelief in free will alters brain correlates of preconscious motor preparation: The brain minds whether we believe in free will or not. Psychological Science 22: 613–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sheldon, K. M., and S. Lyubomirsky. 2004. Achieving sustainable new happiness: Prospects, practices, and prescriptions. In Positive psychology in practice, eds. A. Linley, and S. Joseph, 127–145. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Vohs, K. D., and J. W. Schooler. 2008. The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating. Psychological Science 19: 49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wegner, D. M. 2003. The mind’s best trick: How we experience conscious will. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7: 65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for the Study of Bioethics, Institute of Social Sciences, European Division of the UNESCO Chair in BioethicsUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations