There is nothing moral about the morality pill. We cannot even agree on what morality requires so designing a morality pill is conceptually an impossible task. We already have drugs that affect moral decisions of humans, but it is unclear whether these agents produce better moral choices, an example being citalopram. It causes people to make different moral judgments but as to whether this leads to better moral understanding is unclear. For many of us, it is not sufficient that our neurochemistry can be manipulated to produce better ethical decisions. It also matters that we have made that moral judgments-which we have actively participated in our becoming moral propagators.
There may have people whose brain chemistry does not accommodate compassion and empathy. For these people, drugs like citalopram may be necessary to allow them to function efficiently in the society. But for ordinary people, the hard work of making moral judgments remains ours entirely. The morality of a pill may become indistinguishable from extreme social control. It could be a remedy for governments who want docile citizens. In fact, law enforcement officials have turned to drugs to make people moral.in several countries and in some American states, sex offenders have the option of being chemically castrated with medications that lower libido. Soviet psychiatrists used drugs to cure dissidents of the illness of political deviations.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
More importantly, how do we define the morality these drugs are to enhance? Heartburn might be the same in Africa, Asia or even Europe but morals are not the same everywhere. Some cultures eat their dead; we have societies that give the nod to euthanasia. What would their idea of moral boosting look like?
If we want to improve our society, it would be more comfortable and efficient to improve social conditions. Our personality ought to be built upon our essential foundation which should not be influenced by outside intervention or control. Enhancement of moral sensitivity is not always healthy. Moral improvement requires the strengthening of the person's moral sensitivity, but the consolidation does not necessarily bring happiness.
Morally sensitive people worry about every immoral act they commit. They cannot save every suffering individual whom they encounter. They might think that this is their fault. The reason why ordinary people survive every day is that they are not so morally sensitive that they worry too much about every issue.
Immorality is not like a disease. It is lack of virtue. The four cardinal virtues are justice, wisdom, courage and self-control. Morality pill does not provide this virtue. The trouble is people think of morality as a series of “thou shalt commands”. We need to know where they are because they can hurt us. But the goal of a soldier is not just to avoid land mines; his goal is to win the battle. This means initiating something and not just avoiding something. It is not about preventing wrongdoing. It is about beginning right actions every moment of our lives. Although pills might be able to make moderate improvements in behavior, the pharmaceuticals are not the ultimate solution. Christians believe that the only ultimate solution is Jesus Christ. By the power of the Holy Spirit, those of us who are redeemed can overcome sin and our sinful natures and live for Christ.
Moral Implications of Coercing a Person to take the Morality Pill.
Science fiction sometimes limits our sense of what is possible. It would be self-defeating or worse to try to promote morality through brutal coercion. Governments must not be given the power to control their citizen's moral code since if they had such authority, they would misuse it. It would be ideal if individuals could without coercion explore different ways of improving themselves, whether by practicing mindfulness, reading moral philosophy or taking a morality pill. It is not evident that people would want to take a pill that makes them morally better. It is not clear whether people want to be potentially better.
A compulsory moral bio-enhancement of all people is impossible. This is because powerful, rich and greedy people would use every conceivable method to avoid taking ethical biochemical drugs. Even if drugs are blended into tap water in an area, it is possible to get pure water from elsewhere (Jones, 2013). Additionally, it is difficult to force moral enhancers on those who are in authority to force it on ordinary people. Hence this policy will create two groups of people: those that are forced to take the memory pills and those that can avoid taking such drugs. This is undermining the minority, a moral issue in it its sense.
People should not be coerced to take morality pills. People come from different cultures that teach and propagate different values. It is therefore not right to force particular values on people when they do not freely agree with them. A person who comes from a society that embraces euthanasia (this is morally wrong in some countries) should not be given a morality pill to change his perspective. The person should be left to conceive inherently why the act is illegal and so avoid.
Conclusion
It is therefore not morally acceptable to force a person to take moral pills because it undermines their power of reason. Everyone should be at liberty to choose whether to use the morality pill.
Reference
Jones, D. Gareth. "Moral enhancement as a technological imperative." Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 65.3 (2013): 187-195.
