![\"\"](\"https:\/\/lh3.googleusercontent.com\/-4d_OTqHKTug\/TX6l4yZd9uI\/AAAAAAAABUo\/vXoyK7xET1A\/s1600\/red-pill-or-blue-pill.jpg\")
<\/a><\/div>\nTristyn of Eschatological Psychosis<\/a> jumps the line by prefacing her comment on my review of Brook\u2019s The Social Animal<\/a><\/em> with \u2018TRANHUMANIST QUESTION.\u2019 \u00a0I am powerless to resist. \u00a0Here\u2019s what she asked:<\/p>\n So, we have established that if, in fact, holding warm beverages makes you nicer, going out of your way to find a warm beverage before interacting with an annoying person is acceptable to you. Seems fairly reasonable, though (I think) clearly in a closer-to-ideal world we wouldn\u2019t need such crutches, but we all of us bear far heavier sins than leaning on chocolate from time to time, for whatever reason.<\/p>\n What if there was a drug that made you kinder, more charitable, more forgiving? Let\u2019s say even that it has some negative side effects\u2013 how about all the side effects of amphetamines, drugs commonly prescribed to treat psychology\/behavior (as opposed to the way, say, morphine treats the body, or even how antibiotics treat infections\u2013 hopefully the distinction I\u2019m making is clear?).<\/p>\n From my perspective, it seems obvious that it\u2019s wrong to take the drug. I\u2019m wondering if you agree? My \u201cconclusion\u201d is also way more intuitive than logical. It\u2019s not as though the drug eradicates free will\u2013 it\u2019s kind of like soft paternalism, but in your head. Does that meaningfully devalue our moral agency, and does an atheist care if it achieves her ends?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I\u2019m really torn. \u00a0I can\u2019t tell whether my discomfort with\u00a0temperament\u00a0modification through\u00a0pharmaceuticals\u00a0as opposed to through talk therapy or experience or really focused<\/em> discussions of metaphysics is just an \u2018eeew!\u2019 reaction to anything that seems artificial. \u00a0I know I\u2019m much more hesitant about this course of action than I am about the others.<\/p>\n Plenty of that is motivated by the low level of faith I have in the pharmacological industry and a possibly misplaced confidence in my own moral conduct. \u00a0Although there are a wide range of issues that are productively dealt with by chemical adjustment (paralyzing depression, schizophrenia, etc), psychopharmacology seems a lot more suited to pruning back particularly destructive deviations than fostering some idealized behavior. \u00a0The definition of normal or stable they use is much too limited to be of much help to people who fall sufficiently close to acceptable, as I\u00a0imagine\u00a0I do. \u00a0(If you want to know more about the way psychiatrists have a\u00a0tendency\u00a0to project one mode of behavior on everyone, check out Crazy Like Us: The Globalization of the American Psyche<\/em><\/a>).<\/p>\n Even if those problems were resolved, I run into the same problem that troubles Tristyn. \u00a0I value my own will and my choices to direct it towards its proper functioning. \u00a0Medicating myself better seems like cheating and valuing correct behavior over correct attitude towards behavior. \u00a0I\u2019m also running into the strange problems of persistence of identity through time. \u00a0If my attitudes towards others improves by a jump discontinuity<\/a> rather than according to the normal course of events, it feel a little like I\u2019ve\u00a0annihilated\u00a0myself to allow space for an upgraded version.<\/p>\n Should my metaphysical qualms really stop me from forcing myself to treat others better? \u00a0To what extent should I permit myself to inflict my bad and hurtful behavior on others for the sake of preserving my own moral agency? \u00a0Could I be called to sacrifice my agency and my personal moral development for the sake of others? \u00a0Could I ethically put myself in situations where I would burden or hurt others for the sake of the moral development it would cause me?<\/p>\n I\u2019m not really sure, and I\u2019d be interested in your perspectives. \u00a0And for one special bonus question for Christians like Tristyn: are any of you profoundly uncomfortable with a pharmacological fix but comfortable with the famous \u201cMay I kill it?\u201d passage in C.S. Lewis\u2019s The Great Divorce<\/em><\/a>? \u00a0(The scene I\u2019m referring to is available here<\/a>). \u00a0Both involve being freed of immoral\u00a0tendencies\u00a0by consenting to profound alteration. \u00a0Thoughts?<\/p>\n Tristyn of Eschatological Psychosis jumps the line by prefacing her comment on my review of Brook\u2019s The Social Animal with \u2018TRANHUMANIST QUESTION.\u2019 \u00a0I am powerless to resist. \u00a0Here\u2019s what she asked: So, we have established that if, in fact, holding warm beverages makes you nicer, going out of your way to find a warm beverage […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":127,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[68,48],"tags":[135,18],"class_list":["post-190","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-epistemologyphilosophy","category-morality-in-practice","tag-may-i-kill-it","tag-transhumanism"],"yoast_head":"\n