Abstract:We have argued for an urgent need for moral bioenhancement; that human moral psychology is limited in its ability to address current existential threats due to the evolutionary function of morality to maximize cooperation in small groups. We address here Powell and Buchanan's novel objection that there is an 'inclusivist anomaly': humans have the capacity to care beyond in-groups. They propose that 'exclusivist' (group-based) morality is sensitive to environmental cues that historically indicated out-group threat. When this is not present, we are inclusivist. They conclude that moral bioenhancement is unnecessary or less effective than socio-cultural interventions. We argue that Powell and Buchanan underestimate the hard-wiring features of moral psychology; their appeal to adaptively plastic, conditionally expressed responses accounts for only a fragment of our moral psychology. In addition to restrictions on our altruistic concern that their account addresses - such as racism and sexism - there are ones it is ill-suited to address: that our concern is stronger for kin and friends and for concrete individuals rather than for statistical lives; also our bias towards the near future. Hard-wired features of our moral psychology that are not clearly restrictions in altruistic concern also include reciprocity, tit-for-tat, and others. Biomedical means are not the only, and maybe not the most important, means of moral enhancement. Socio-cultural means are of great importance and there are currently no biomedical interventions for many hard-wired features. Nevertheless research is desirable because the influence of these features is greater than our critics think.

Who's afraid of perfectionist moral enhancement? A reply to Sparrow

Moral Perfectionism and Moral Values, Virtues, and Judgments: Further Investigations

Moral perfectionism and moral values, virtues, and judgments: A preliminary investigation

Perfectionism and Emotional Reactions to Perfect and Flawed Achievements: Satisfaction and Pride Only when Perfect

Different games of moral bioenhancement

Sexual dimorphism and human enhancement

Moral Positive Illusion: Self–other Valuation Difference in Moral Foundation Theory

Moral Hard-Wiring and Moral Enhancement

The Perils of Cognitive Enhancement and the Urgent Imperative to Enhance the Moral Character of Humanity

Why Moral Bioenhancement Cannot Reliably Produce Virtue

AI Moral Enhancement: Upgrading the Socio-Technical System of Moral Engagement

Unfreedom or Mere Inability? The Case of Biomedical Enhancement

Virtue Theory for Moral Enhancement

“Healthy Perfectionism” is an Oxymoron!: Reflections on the Psychology of Perfectionism and the Sociology of Science

An Empirically Informed Critique of Habermas’ Argument from Human Nature

Is Doing Good Good Enough? A Motivation, Action, Sacrifice, and Temptation (MAST) View of Moral Praiseworthiness

Toward a Bold Agenda for Moral Education

Public Reason, Bioethics, and Public Policy: A Seductive Delusion or Ambitious Aspiration?

Why do we need to employ exemplars in moral education? Insights from recent advances in research on artificial intelligence

[Towards perfection: the ethical downside of the ideal of beauty]

Behavior Change or Empowerment: On the Ethics of Health-Promotion Goals