Comments on: Cognitive enhancement and a new social contract

By: MJ

MJ — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 20:17:17 +0000

I agree– and I don’t see e.g., China putting many controls on enhancement, especially if it lets them siphon talent and money from the West.

You might enjoy this– it’s a description of some double-edged genes which influence intelligence. The same sort of tradeoffs might be present with artificial enhancement. http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/cochran/overclocking.html

By: Sebastian Marshall

Sebastian Marshall — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 09:19:47 +0000

Interesting point. One tough question to answer will be what to do with nations who don’t put controls on enhacenements – you would think people would go to those places to utilize their economy in the field and escape regulation. Perhaps tests can be devised for some enhancements like anabolic steroids are testable now, but that opens up a whole other can of worms.

But it’s an interesting thought, yeah. Some potential enhancements are double-edged: higher testosterone, for instance, will let you build muscle and heal faster, but has a chance to increase your assertiveness and aggression levels. So there’s definitely something worth thinking about getting enhancements done right.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:52:16 +0000

Larry,

Tough questions.
1. I think with unregulated cognitive enhancement we get into a runaway feedback loop of smarter and more naked self-interest that increasingly frays the existing social contract. More greed, more terrorism, fewer commonalities. The existing social contract sorta hangs together now because everybody's fundamentally pretty much the same.

2. Kinder; more altruistic; more empathetic. Less likely to be cruel.

3. I think we need to draw from the neural correlates of 'niceness'. Oxytocin, mirror neurons, the neuroscience of empathy and tribalism, how normal people differ from psychopaths.

4. Yes and no-- I don't particularly trust the government to benevolently and competently control the application of this technology. My idea would involve some legal regulation, but it would be in service of setting up a new social norm regarding what a 'proper' enhancement procedure involves.

By: Larry Sanger

Larry Sanger — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 06:53:06 +0000

Three questions for you, Mike:

* Do you dare to get explicit about what you actually fear would happen?

* What do you mean by "nicer"?

* Who decides whether you are "nicer," or in other words, who licenses and controls the technology to make yourself smarter?

Aren't you basically just saying that the government had better be in control of this technology, and this should not actually be driven by the free market?