Comment · Tue, October 15, 2013 · Ceretropic
A short article I wrote on the ethics of "smart drugs".
What they were answering
sqrrl101 · 1 points
I'd completely agree that what you do with your own body should ultimately be for you to decide; I think all drugs should be available without legal restriction. I view cognitive liberty as a pretty fundamental right and the war on drugs as an utter failure. That doesn't mean that ethics are completely irrelevant, though, if only because so many people think that their ethical outlook should determine what chemicals you or I are allowed to ingest, and governments listen to these people. They may not be ethics that you or I agree with, but they're still relevant to the debate on this topic.
This is an unfortunate state of affairs, but it's the one we're stuck with, so my intention with this article was to get people to critically examine their assumptions when it comes to nootropics. It's mainly aimed at people who aren't particularly familiar with the issue, so I avoided making a strong rhetorical argument in favour of wider adoption of cognition enhancing drugs, and instead focused on providing an overview of the issue and raising some key questions of major relevance.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Ceretropic
Ohh, don't take my absolutionist tone as being critical of your writing. I was just speaking in general. In a perfect world, ethics don't come into play at all. Obviously we don't live in a perfect world, and people are going to try and argue that their ethics should dictate my actions. In those instances, one needs to make an ethical case to the contrary. I just wish it didn't need to be that way.