| Title |
Compulsory administration of oxytocin does not result in genuine moral enhancement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11019-017-9762-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vojin Rakić |
| Abstract |
The question will be raised whether oxytocin can serve as an effective moral enhancer. Different types of moral enhancement will be addressed, one of them being compulsory moral enhancement. It will be argued that oxytocin cannot serve as an effective moral enhancer if its use is being made compulsory. Hence, compulsory administration of oxytocin does not result in genuine moral enhancement. In order to demonstrate this, a stipulation of the main potentially beneficial outcomes of using oxytocin as a moral enhancer will be offered, as well as a discussion of objections to the notion that oxytocin can be an effective moral enhancer. It will be concluded that mandatory administration of oxytocin is ineffective because of a combination of two reasons: (1) mandatory administration of oxytocin renders moral reflection practically superfluous; (2) without moral reflection the beneficial outcomes of the use of oxytocin do not outweigh its drawbacks to the degree that we could speak of effective moral enhancement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 4 | 27% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 13% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,577,751
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#474
of 595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,696
of 310,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,891 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.