Why less praise for enhanced performance?

Moving beyond responsibility-shifting, authenticity, and cheating to a nature of activities approach

Filippo Santoni de Sio, Nadira Faber, Julian Savulescu, Nicole Vincent

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Many appeal to responsibility-shifting, authenticity, or cheating arguments to support the intuition that less praise is due enhanced agents. In this chapter, the authors present original empirical data that show a connection between the less praise intuition (LPI) and the public’s negative attitude toward pharmacological performance enhancement. They then draw on examples from performance enhancement in sport and professional contexts to demonstrate that these arguments for LPI are not sound or leave something out, and they develop a better justification for LPI. On this account, praise is diminished by the presence of enhancers not because praise is shifted to someone else, because it is due to an inauthentic self, or because an otherwise good performance is blemished by cheating but because enhancement may change the nature of activities in which actors are involved and thus we need different yardsticks to assess their performance.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationCognitive enhancement
Subtitle of host publicationethical and policy implications in international perspectives
EditorsFabrice Jotterand, Veljko Dubljevic
Place of PublicationNew York
PublisherOxford University Press
Pages27-41
Number of pages15
ISBN (Electronic)9780199396825, 9780199396832
ISBN (Print)9780199396818
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jul 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Why less praise for enhanced performance? Moving beyond responsibility-shifting, authenticity, and cheating to a nature of activities approach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this