You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Moral Bioenhancement, Freedom and Reason
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuroethics, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12152-016-9268-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingmar Persson, Julian Savulescu |
| Abstract |
In this paper we reply to the most important objections to our advocacy of moral enhancement by biomedical means - moral bioenhancement - that John Harris advances in his new book How to be Good. These objections are to effect that such moral enhancement undercuts both moral reasoning and freedom. The latter objection is directed more specifically at what we have called the God Machine, a super-duper computer which predicts our decisions and prevents decisions to perpertrate morally atrocious acts. In reply, we argue first that effective moral bioenhancement presupposes moral reasoning rather than undermines it. Secondly, that the God Machine would leave us with extensive freedom and that the restrictions it imposes on it are morally justified by the prevention of harm to victims. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 States | 4 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Turkey | 1 | 6% |
| Singapore | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 75% |
| Scientists | 3 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Professor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philosophy | 19 | 48% |
| Psychology | 4 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 30 January 2017.
All research outputs
#1,875,118
of 25,121,016 outputs
Outputs from Neuroethics
#78
of 435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,568
of 363,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroethics
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,121,016 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 363,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
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. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.