MMTs and the "True Self"
A person
can hide his or her true self from others by successfully pretending to have
different inclinations and desires than those that he or she does have, but new
memory modification technologies (MMTs) can now make it possible to hide one’s
true self by editing one’s memories. Memories are a major part of our
identities. Some memories are not central to a person’s identity, but it is
difficult to determine which memories are trivial and which ones are significant. Editing these significant memories, however, may seem “incompatible with remaining true to ourselves.” Alexandre Erler
argues that the use of MMTs threaten a person’s authenticity. While memory
enhancement does not, in itself, threaten the authenticity of a person, memory editing can threaten truthfulness. Memory
enhancement, which ranges from using mnemonic devices to pharmacological
enhancers such as Alzheimer’s drugs, can actually provide a variety of benefits.
For example, it can be used as a treatment or cure for obsessive compulsive
disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other illnesses that stem from painful
past memories. It can promote self-cultivation, knowledge, general well-being,
and a greater ability to learn from one’s mistakes. Reducing the vividness of a
memory or erasing a memory completely is the kind of editing that Erler finds
problematic.
According to S. Matthew Liao, changing our memories
may change what we believe to be true about ourselves. “We may believe that we
are brave or cowardly; altruistic or selfish; generous or stingy; and we may
identify ourselves with certain ideologies: liberal or conservative;
egalitarian or elitist; feminist or male-chauvinist, and so on.” Changing the
memory of one or two pivotal moments in our lives can alter how we view
ourselves and destroy our authenticity. Liao presents three different accounts
of authenticity: the wholeheartedness account, the existentialist account, and
the “true self” account. In the first account, an authentic person
wholeheartedly identifies with certain desires and acts upon these preferences.
In the existentialist account, an authentic person has both honesty and
autonomy in his or her life choices and takes full responsibility for these
choices. In the true self account, an authentic person is faithful to a “true”
self that is not just a product of his or her choices. This virtue comprises
one’s identity, according to Liao. Although there is no fully accepted
definition of authenticity of a person, Liao finds the true self account the
most accurate. If someone is not true to himself or herself when doing so would
be valuable, then he or she is not authentic.
Is it wrong to radically change oneself and become “inauthentic”?
What is the relevant difference between using MMTs to change oneself and profoundly
reforming oneself through a rehabilitation process? This inauthenticity can be
problematic because it interferes with the process that caused a person to
respond in a certain way to a particular situation. Liao and others argue that
MMTs provide people with a distorted view of themselves and the world. Consider
a case in which a man with a traumatic childhood who turns to a life of crime
cannot find relief from agony with psychotherapy or the use of propranolol. If
these treatments are not alleviating his pain or helping him suppress his
desire to commit crimes, would it be immoral for him to relieve his suffering
with memory editing tools? It is disturbing to think that criminals can live
their whole lives without remembering any crimes they committed prior to a
treatment like this. It may be ethically sensible to erase the man’s traumatic childhood
memories to prevent further suffering and further compulsions related to
criminal activity, but not to an extent that the man can be exempt from taking responsibility
for his crimes. If people who commit crimes that harm others can simply forget
their guilt and wrongdoings by using MMTs, a basic deterrent is lost.
Other issues with memory editing
include the lack of specificity and its limited use, for the moment.
Researchers are still unsure of the mechanisms behind memory deletion. They are
not sure if memories are weakened due to changes in synaptic networks or if
there is a change in the retrieval process of the memory. Also, when deleting
or editing one memory, other memories connected to the target memory will be
affected. This leads to a problem with specificity. After considering the
implications of memory editing techniques and the benefits of using this
technology to treat illnesses and reduce suffering, it is still ultimately up
to individuals to decide how to use MMTs, as long as there is no prima facie
duty to not interfere with certain memories.
Sources:
Images:
No comments:
Post a Comment