Bioethics Course Asks Students: Should We Enhance Our Minds?

What if we could enhance our own thoughts? In Bioethics of Cognitive Enhancement, students explore what freedom of thought looks like, how far our minds extend, and whether they can — or should — be regulated.

The philosophy course, taught by Christopher Kochevar, a postdoctoral researcher in bioethics at the University Center for Human Values, examines questions at the intersection of philosophy, neuroscience, and law. Students consider a range of technologies from pharmacological agents, like Adderall and psychedelics, to emerging neurotechnologies, including brain-computer interfaces, to boost cognitive functions in otherwise healthy individuals.

Early in the course, students grapple with defining the terms, including “enhancement,” “treatment,” and “cognition,” and apply those ideas to class debates and group projects.

“It’s actually very hard to say what enhancement is,” Kochevar said.

Kochevar, who previously worked as an attorney at the Food and Drug Administration, said that the course draws on debates that emerged in the early 2000s, when biotechnology first took off. He also spoke about the varying urgency of different technologies, from taking Adderall to study to the possibility of genetically modifying a human being.

He wants students to think broadly about these questions and terms across disciplines. “You can treat it as just a bioethics class, but I think it’s hard to do that without seeing the bigger picture of technology, society, and justice,” he said.

Rose Weathers ’27, an electrical and computer engineering major, wants to work on cognitive enhancement, particularly with brain-computer interfaces, in the future, and said she appreciated the opportunity to explore new technologies in the course. For many students, including Weathers, this is their first philosophy class, and according to Kochevar, no philosophy majors are registered.

“An overarching theme that I’ve learned is kind of how philosophy papers work and how they’re written,” Weathers said. “A lot of times, the professor does a good job of setting up the readings in dialogue with each other.”

That approach was on display in a recent seminar where students discussed whether technology and enhancement are a natural next step in human evolution or a drastic technological overreach. Rather than arriving at a single answer, the students considered each other’s perspectives and conversed across different texts and frameworks.

James Thompson ’27, a neuroscience major, said he is excited to extend what he learned into his final project. He and Weathers are working together to examine data privacy concerns with brain-computer interfaces, specifically related to existing data collection, such as Google Search optimization, and the potential future implications of accessing data directly from the brain.

As students consider what it means to enhance the mind, and how, the question remains not just whether we can change the way we think, but whether we should. By L.O.