The pros and cons of "smart pills"--mind-enhancing pharmaceuticals--are
weighed by students as an exercise in critical thinking.
By Daniel Rigney
uppose
that a pharmaceutical company brings a new drug to market next year--a "smart
pill" capable of increasing your intelligence by, let us say, 20%. Suppose further
that this pill has undergone extensive tests and has no known side effects. It is
perfectly legal, and it is affordable and available to anyone who wants to try it.
Those who take the drug report that they can grasp abstract concepts more clearly,
solve problems more creatively, learn more deeply, and retain what they have learned for
longer periods of time. If they don't like the effects of the pill, they may simply
discontinue its use and revert to their previous levels of mental functioning.
Under these circumstances, would you choose to take the smart pill or not, and why?
This is a question we have posed to about a thousand bright high-school seniors over
the past 15 years in their interviews for admission to the undergraduate honors program at
St. Mary's University. The question is normally presented to small focus groups of as many
as eight students, with interviewers playing the role of devil's advocate and challenging
students to consider multiple sides of the issue. Stimulating discussions often ensue.
Through the course of these focus groups, we have had the opportunity to explore diverse
facets of the issue of pharmaceutically enhanced intelligence.
The smart pill question is not merely hypothetical. Such technology is already upon us,
as researchers continue to synthesize ever more varied and powerful psychoactive
substances. Reckoning with the possibility of a smart pill will only become more urgent in
the future. Already, products that are claimed to enhance cognitive function, such as
ginkgo biloba, are available over the counter. Meanwhile, pharmaceutical laboratories
continue to produce a torrent of new prescription drugs with mind-altering (and possibly
mind-enhancing) properties.
***
Among those who oppose the smart pill, not all believe that such mental technologies
should be illegal. Many take the more libertarian view that, while the smart pill is not
right for them, it might well be appropriate for certain others and should be available to
them.
Some cite self-actualization as a reason [to oppose the smart pill]. Others fear that
if they do not take the pill they will fall behind their competitors on the fast track to
graduate and professional school and beyond. Still others speak of the good they can do
with their enhanced intelligence, whether for themselves (in material terms) or for
others. The Faustians among them dream of seeing over the next hill--knowing more than
they could ever hope to know without the aid of the artificial.
***
"What If" as a Teaching Tool
The smart pill question has proven itself useful, both in our interviews and in classroom
discussions, as a pedagogical device for teaching critical and complex thinking, moral
reasoning, and an orientation toward the future.
While much of the future remains a mystery, this much seems virtually certain: The
continual creation of new substances with psychoactive effects will bring the issue of
pharmaceutically enhanced intelligence increasingly into public view and debate. We tell
our interviewees that the smart pill question will not go away. It is a question that they
and their children are almost certain to face in their lifetimes. More of us should be
thinking about it now.
