Skip to content

Psychedelics as moral bioenhancers: Protocol for a scoping review of ethical arguments for and against.

Samuel Streicher, Christopher Register, Xiu Lim, Maide Barış, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Katherine Cheung, Emma C Gordon, David Yaden, Julian Savulescu, Brian D. Earp

Wellcome Open Res January 13, 2025 DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.23414.1 via PubMed Central

Summary

AI-generated from the abstract

A protocol is described for a scoping review that will map ethical arguments for and against the voluntary use of psychedelics as moral bioenhancers. The review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, searching multiple databases for published and unpublished sources that present explicit ethical arguments. Sources focused primarily on clinical treatment or unavailable in English will be excluded. Two independent raters will assess eligibility, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Data will be charted and analyzed following PRISMA-ScR guidelines.

Study at a glance

Characteristics Scoping review protocol Peer reviewed
Keywords Psychedelics Moral enhancement Bioethics Mental health Neuroscience
Citations 2

Abstract

Background: Moral bioenhancement typically refers to the deliberate use of drugs or biotechnologies, potentially alongside other practices, to attempt to improve oneself morally. In addition to general concerns regarding moral self-bioenhancement, the possibility of using psychedelic substances for such purposes raises distinct ethical questions. As a first step in analysing these questions, we intend to perform a scoping review of the existing arguments for and against the use of psychedelics as moral bioenhancers. We will focus primarily on voluntary use by individuals, although voluntary use by couples or small groups will be considered. The present contribution is a protocol for this scoping review. Methods: Our scoping review will adhere to the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, which involves five stages: (1) identifying the research question, (2) developing the search strategy, (3) setting inclusion criteria, (4) extracting data, and (5) presenting and analysing the results. We will include both published and unpublished sources if they explicitly present ethical arguments for or against the voluntary use of psychedelics as intentional moral bioenhancers in adults. We will search for relevant studies in Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The National Library of Medicine, the Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Philosopher's Index, the Bioethics Literature Database, EthxWeb, PhilPapers, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Philosopher's Index, EBSCO, BASE, and WorldCat. Sources will be excluded if (a) the full text is inaccessible, (b) the main text is in a language other than English, or (c) the focus is not primarily on ethical arguments (for example, focusing primarily on the clinical use of psychedelics for treatment). Two raters will independently assess all articles for eligibility, with disagreements to be resolved with a third reviewer. Data from eligible articles will be charted using a standardised data extraction form. The data will be analysed following PRISMA-ScR guidelines.

Comments

No comments yet.

Log in to comment