Evan Selinger I EET > Rights > Neuroethics > Life > Enablement > Vision > Futurism > Contributors > Evan Selinger Print  Email  permalink  (2) Comments  (1758) Hits  subscribe       0 When the Morality Pill Becomes a Thoughtless Experiment Evan Selinger Ethical Technology Posted: Mar 26, 2012 Along with researcher Agata Sagan, Princeton’s Peter Singer—perhaps the world’s most well-known bioethicist—recently wrote a NY Tim es article that asked readers to consider whether they’re ready to endorse a hypothetical “morality pill” —a drug that alters brain chemistry and prompts altruistic behavior. Singer and Sagan introduce this pharmacological idea to bring a new question to life: Will outdated conceptions of free will get in the way of sound moral reasoning? However interesting this question might at first sound, it is formulated in rhetorical terms that misrepresent medical science fiction as if it were a meditation on a provocative empirical scientific trajectory. Although Singer and Sagan might characterize their article as a classic thought experiment, their framing is so problematic that we introduce a new and deliberately provocative label called a thoughtless experiment. (editor’s note: This article was co-written with Thomas Seager and Jathan Sadowski. Their bios are posted at the end of this essay.) Thoughtless experiments crowd out good writing on science, technology, and ethics and deepen the ties between popularization and undue sensationalism. To avoid being sucked into a thoughtless experiment, readers should be on the lookout for three warning signs: 1) fake problems, 2) false social choices, and 3) ignorance of empirical evidence. Singer and Sagan’s case suffers from all of these deficiencies. As we explain why, we’ll draw comparison with a different, but related thought experiment proposed by Neil Levy, Deputy Director of the Oxford Center for Neuroethics. While we disagree with Levy’s conclusion, we respect how he addresses a difficult problem. A Fake Problem Singer and Sagan could have described their reflections as a science fiction scenario constructed to expand our collective moral imagination. If that were the case, we’d be fine with how they brought ethical concerns to “The Stone”—a forum that gives the public a window into what philosophers deem important. In fact, we’d likely applaud their willingness to bracket present constraints to bring into relief fundamental questions about the relation between agency and accountability. For example, Guy Kahane’s prior version of the problem, “Would We Swallow a ‘Morality’ Pill?”, does just this and makes for a fine piece of popular writing. Unfortunately, Singer and Sagan word their musings in a manner that presents a fake problem as if it were a real danger. To create a titillating lead, they open by discussing a headline-grabbing case involving a small child in China being run over by two different vehicles while bystanders essentially ignored her, lying helpless in the street. Despite the suggestion that society might contain a number of callous people, their account of an admittedly terrible event does not indicate a hit and run epidemic, even if we acknowledge that there has been at least one other, similar incidents over the years. Nevertheless, the answer to human callousness, they suggest, might lie in a study of rat behavior that could be interpreted as suggesting only some rats have empathy for other rats. They speculate that perhaps the variability among rats arises from neurochemical causes, and make the leap of faith that pills could be developed that would presumably cause rats act altruistically towards other rats, and eventually, cause humans to do the same for other humans. While they claim Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join Login Register Support the IEET The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future. Via PayPal Search Subscribe to: Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh? Quick overview of biopolitical points of view True Grit: Can Perseverance Be Taught? Becoming Cyber Angels What Would You Do - with the infinite extra years - If You Were Immortal? IEET rated #1 in “Top 10 Non-Profits Straight Outta Science Fiction” 2045: A New Era for Humanity Defending Politics: Why democracy matters When the Morality Pill Becomes a Thoughtless Experiment http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/selinger20120326 1 of 5 5/10/2012 7:56 AM