3 ms·

What do you guys think government policy should be on this stuff? I go back and forth. I generally think of myself as a civil libertarian, so my initial reacti

What do you guys think government policy should be on this stuff? I go back and forth. I generally think of myself as a civil libertarian, so my initial reaction is to say that "people can take care of themselves" and then to let things go, but I do think that the fact that concentration drugs provide significant competitive advantage in many fields of work and study (and the resulting pressure to use them to keep up) has the potential to be an enormous problem. I really don't want to live in a world where people have to choose between drugs and comparative failure.

JacobAldridge 17y ago
I'd also call myself libertarian, so lean towards 'people can take care of themselves' (which can also be translated as 'people can make their own mistakes'). In the artificial world of university, there may be an advantage to enhancers. Outside that world, there are some sectors where it may also be an advantage, probably within the same "twenty-four hour work cycle" paradigm the article mentioned. (Hacking constantly for your startup, perhaps) But for most people, I doubt any advantage would last past college. If I started popping Adderall my clients would wonder why I was suddenly so intense, and my wife would wonder why we don't relax watching dvds much any more - there's no advantage in the life I want to lead. But hey - if your startup is built on drugs and improves my life, go for it.
Ardit20 17y ago
The article mentions that we should have equal opportunities, namely people with low cognitive abilities should be able to enhance them so they can compete with those people whose nature has given high cognitive abilities. Perhaps, if cognition is something completely hereditary and nurture plays a very small role, then sure allow them to have equal capacity, but as the story of Alex clearly shows this does not create equal opportunity but unfair advantage and competition. The guy is able to go out there drink and party and then do the paper in a short time and not really gain the greater knowledge from lecturers. So he is hacking education and focusing on only these papers and gets better grades, but surely he is not a better man for the job than the person who spend his time studying and attending lectures although short of time failed to finish all the essays to a high standard. So I think they create unfair competition and advantage hence should be banned.

JacobAldridge 17y ago

I'd also call myself libertarian, so lean towards 'people can take care of themselves' (which can also be translated as 'people can make their own mistakes'). In the artificial world of university, there may be an advantage to enhancers. Outside that world, there are some sectors where it may also be an advantage, probably within the same "twenty-four hour work cycle" paradigm the article mentioned. (Hacking constantly for your startup, perhaps) But for most people, I doubt any advantage would last past college. If I started popping Adderall my clients would wonder why I was suddenly so intense, and my wife would wonder why we don't relax watching dvds much any more - there's no advantage in the life I want to lead. But hey - if your startup is built on drugs and improves my life, go for it.

Ardit20 17y ago

The article mentions that we should have equal opportunities, namely people with low cognitive abilities should be able to enhance them so they can compete with those people whose nature has given high cognitive abilities. Perhaps, if cognition is something completely hereditary and nurture plays a very small role, then sure allow them to have equal capacity, but as the story of Alex clearly shows this does not create equal opportunity but unfair advantage and competition. The guy is able to go out there drink and party and then do the paper in a short time and not really gain the greater knowledge from lecturers. So he is hacking education and focusing on only these papers and gets better grades, but surely he is not a better man for the job than the person who spend his time studying and attending lectures although short of time failed to finish all the essays to a high standard. So I think they create unfair competition and advantage hence should be banned.