Moral 'Enhancement' Technology: A Bad Idea
Moral enhancement technology is something "leaders" and "social scientists" have thought about for ways to "improve" human behavior. They think we might be better off if they induced "moral" obedience.
But would it really be moral? Why are they not trying to educate and provide accurate moral understanding through conscious willful effort on our part, instead of our default automatic intuitive attempts to live morally and fail from a lack of understanding moral principles?
Source
Research into moral enhancement technology concludes this technology is not wise to implement, nor feasible (at least for now). I say it's foolish to want to (and even downright wrong/evil to do so). People who think they can force moral obedience through technological mind control instead of educating moral understanding are the fools. I bet authority figures would love a way to manipulate morality, for our own betterment and benefit of course, right? We can trust the government and other authorities to look out for what's better for us...
The idea behind this is about using bio-medical technology to make people more moral, as if it's some mere physical attribute that can be tweaked. We've seen this play out in the past when behavior doesn't match up to the "expectations" others have. They introduced lobotomies as a way to "heal" people, but they ended up just making people into zombies of sorts.
We have refined our brain surgery now it seems, where some criminals can get some surgery for moral defects or take drugs to treat their behavior. The "need" to "enhance" the behavioral compliance of everyone else seems to be on the minds of those in political power.
Well the research shows that even if you can manipulate or modify the sense of morality in people, you can't make sure they improve their behavior towards being more moral.
Researchers reviewed existing research on these technologies, like pharmaceutical interventions and neurostimulation techniques:
- Oxytocin for social cognition, bonding and behavior.
- SSRIs used to treat depression can make people less aggressive.
- Amphetamines to motivate action.
- Beta-blockers to decrease racist responses.
- Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) used for depression and affects moral dilemmas.
- Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) for utilitarian compliance.
- Deep brain stimulation to enhance motivation.
Yes, these techniques have effects, "but these techniques are all blunt instruments, rather than finely tuned technologies that could be helpful. So, moral enhancement is really a bad idea," says Veljko Dubljevic, lead author of the research paper.
As much as Oxytocin might be good for social bonding and behavior, it's only for the in-group, showing decreased cooperatiom coming at the expense of out-groups like racial minorities. The oxytocin promotes ethnocentrism, favoritism and narrowmindedness. The amphetamines boost all types of behavior, not only the moral kind. Beta-blockers will blunt all emotional responses. SSRIs increase the risk of suicide. And the brain stimulation technology didn't work on moral behavior.
I for one am glad that at least there is a study that can help to prevent further advancement in this foolish idea of moral enhancement technology through physical changes in the brain first. Morality is known through the psychological dimension that manifests through our actions and behaviors. It's not created through the physical alone despite any neurochemical effects that can affect moral decision making.
Aspects of moral living can be affected through the bio-natural physiology, conditioned through our social environment, and also willfully and voluntarily developed through conscious active contemplation, reflection and analysis. The latter method is the way to actually become more moral.
Instead of relying on technology to try to improve our lot, we need to improve ourselves by our own power, our will power to want to change for the better, not be forced to by those in power who try to control.
References:
- 'Moral enhancement' technologies are neither feasible nor wise
- Veljko Dubljević, Eric Racine. Moral Enhancement Meets Normative and Empirical Reality: Assessing the Practical Feasibility of Moral Enhancement Neurotechnologies. Bioethics, 2017; 31 (5): 338 DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12355
Getting rid of the current system of education and instead teaching critical thinking and reasoning would be a more effective manner in which to enhance morality. I believe that many lack the capability to reason which would otherwise lead them to more principled living.
Yes, learning how to think and how to learn are the underpinnings to develop proper moral comprehension ;)
"willfully and voluntarily developed through conscious active contemplation, reflection and analysis. The latter method is the way to actually become more moral.
Instead of relying on technology to try to improve our lot, we need to improve ourselves by our own power, our will power"
Exactly.
The development and spread of AI clandestinely requires Humans to emulate a machine's motion sequence. So we repeat certain patterns more and more and until they get deeply engrained in us. Doing so, some areas in our brain are more active than usual, others less. Repetitive motion sequences lead to comfort and non-thinking, questioning. Simply like a machine. Yet what becomes inactive is our creativity, willpower, power of questioning things.
So the willpower you address here is definitely something that gets lost the more we flow towards AI.
Morality is being developed within, not without. No one can possibly tell us what is moral, WE need to experience it. Emulating external 'moral obedience' is artificial itself, and when we follow that we blindly follow others' ideals.
Great read, and you address things I have been pondering as well lately! ;)
Yup, that's the unthinking, automatic, unconscious, involuntary modality ;)
People can tell others what is moral, and they need to explain it so that's the understanding is demonstrated as truth ;) Blindly accepting what others claim is moral is indeed not wise. You don't need to experience every immorality in order to know it as such ;)
And it is too bad that psychology today is soooo screwed up.
Else they could make better understandings of what these drugs do.
The typical anti-depressant is actually a depressant.
Apathy is the emotional level where people will commit suicide.
It is the bottom level.
But, the steps up from that are anger, revenge...
So, the psychologists, who really do not want to help people, prefer to keep the person down in apathy. Where they won't harm anyone. They are so much easier to deal with when they are almost a vegetable.
And i agree with you, that the psychopathic controllers look to these "medicines" as control mechanisms. Because any control is good control.
Yeah, SSRI's kill emotional flux and keep people at a "dead" baseline that leads to apathy and not care, drive and meaning derived in life.
This doesn't sound good at all.
Morality should be developed only through education, not through artificial means.
Besides, if that technology actually worked, it would also allow to make people *less moral and commit all sort of crazy things. Well, now that I think about it, that technology probably already exists in the military
Yes indeed, real education, to be raised properly in moral understanding. Depending on technology weakens us in many ways, despite helping us in others :/
It is not good for technology to manipulate our ethical morality about human life and the future, about the women and men of tomorrow, and also about the cultural legacy and the values in which they should be educated.
Technological manipulation does not have the right to tell us what is good and what is bad, because that is our life, it is a learning world from birth to death, we always live in a school where from the beginning we are taught the moralities of life , of our life.
Yup, technology as a means of greater freedom or control... double edged sword :/
I agree with what you reveal in this post. Technology will not be able to change human morals. Because it arises from the human heart and mind. Then how the hearts and minds of people will be moved with the influence of technology. This is very unreasonable.
But by mobilizing ourselves in social life to work together by providing good examples.
Indeed, morality comes through consciousness and conscience ;)
They will not rest until control is absolute. Individualism is not good for the collective, is not efficient in the productivity of the farm.
Yeah, conform to the group and be a good productive member of society
Moral Enhancement Tech will always be a more effective form of control than an actual tool for the greater good. That won't stop them from claiming it's for the greater good though. The ends justify the means, don't cha know.
... who cares about the way it's done, just get it done :P lol
Indeed a bad idea. I would fear how they would play with our moral conscience and how they may measure morality. Would the belief in God soon be out of their equation? I think there have been experiments by our government in controlling the mind and morality before. Yikes. Almost sounds like an episode of the Twilight Zone thanks @krnel.
The belief in God is a non-technological way to enforce obedience and fabricate moral concepts.
Some people believe that there is a God who judges actions or words, and applies its morality to the deed, often with a punishment for disobeying or disbelieving, and a reward for obedience and faith.
This is a possible form of manipulation.
This belief can work to manipulate their behavior, as well as influence society in general, in ways that some could call absolutely chilling.
Yeah, it's pretty Twilight fucked up for sure :/
Affecting people through ideas is at the end of the day the most potent means. It also happens constantly whether we want it or not. But it is incredibly difficult ... and dangerous.
Yup, influence is part of life, conscious or not ;)
Furthermore, it takes a real together and free thinking individual to not let himself be influenced by others and instead as a king and his advisors make up his mind himself.