Distributive justice and cognitive enhancement in lower, normal intelligence.
There exists a significant disparity within society between individuals in terms of intelligence. While intelligence varies naturally throughout society, the extent to which this impacts on the life opportunities it affords to each individual is greatly undervalued. Intelligence appears to have a prominent effect over a broad range of social and economic life outcomes. Many key determinants of well-being correlate highly with the results of IQ tests, and other measures of intelligence, and an IQ of 75 is generally accepted as the most important threshold in modern life. The ability to enhance our cognitive capacities offers an exciting opportunity to correct disabling natural variation and inequality in intelligence. Pharmaceutical cognitive enhancers, such as modafinil and methylphenidate, have been shown to have the capacity to enhance cognition in normal, healthy individuals. Perhaps of most relevance is the presence of an 'inverted U effect' for most pharmaceutical cognitive enhancers, whereby the degree of enhancement increases as intelligence levels deviate further below the mean. Although enhancement, including cognitive enhancement, has been much debated recently, we argue that there are egalitarian reasons to enhance individuals with low but normal intelligence. Under egalitarianism, cognitive enhancement has the potential to reduce opportunity inequality and contribute to relative income and welfare equality in the lower, normal intelligence subgroup. Cognitive enhancement use is justifiable under prioritarianism through various means of distribution; selective access to the lower, normal intelligence subgroup, universal access, or paradoxically through access primarily to the average and above average intelligence subgroups. Similarly, an aggregate increase in social well-being is achieved through similar means of distribution under utilitarianism. In addition, the use of cognitive enhancement within the lower, normal intelligence subgroup negates, or at the very least minimises, several common objections to cognitive enhancement. Subsequently, this paper demonstrates that there is a compelling case for cognitive enhancement use in individuals with lower, normal intelligence.
University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Mikael
M
Dunlop
Julian
J
Savulescu
D001559:Benzhydryl Compounds / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003071:Cognition / Q000187:drug effects; D028663:Ethical Theory; D006801:Humans; D007182:Income; D008607:Intellectual Disability / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000523:psychology; D007360:Intelligence; D007361:Intelligence Tests; D008774:Methylphenidate / Q000008:administration & dosage; D000077408:Modafinil; D018697:Nootropic Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage; D011788:Quality of Life; D012935:Social Justice / Q000941:ethics*; D012946:Social Welfare / Q000941:ethics; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D006113:United Kingdom
D001559:Benzhydryl Compounds; D018697:Nootropic Agents; D008774:Methylphenidate; D000077408:Modafinil