Mind Health

Would you torture or hurt another, even kill, just because you were ordered to by an authority figure? Beware your answer. A modern reproduction of a classic behavioral experiment of the 1960s suggests many people would. In 1961 Stanley Milgram carried out one of the most famous and controversial psychology experiments of modern times. People were asked to give what they believed were increasingly painful electric shocks to others, even potentially fatal ones, in the name of science. The people being tortured by electricity were in fact just actors and pretend to writhe and scream in pain. But the “subjects” of the experiment didn’t know that. They believed the pain was real and yet, when told to do so by the researcher, were willing to inflict more and more pain and actually risk killing someone else. Some people even pressed the button when they were told the jolt would be a potentially fatal 450 volts. It was a sad scientific proof of something horrible about our species that we would all rather not believe.

A big story broke this week with discussion of the ethical use of brain boosting drugs (known imposingly as “cognitive enhancement” drugs). The row was triggered by an editorial in the prestigious journal; Nature (Dec 11th 2008), calling for the freedom to take such substances. Nature, a very “upmarket” science journal, had polled its readers and found 20% of top scientists already took cognitive enhancement substances. Studies have already suggested that between 5% and 15% of college students use brain-boosting drugs, mostly Ritalin or Adderall. Banned street drugs, such as marijuana, ecstasy and LSD are also “cognitive enhancement” substances, remember. So the outcry is understandable. Even if the must-meddle-in-other-peoples-freedoms crowd had failed to notice and get involved, the how-do-we-know-its-safe group, which includes me, might want to express their concerns. Then there is the issue of “Is it fair?” Are people who take drug enhancements not leap-frogging over everyone else? We ban sports performers from doing that because it’s considered not quite nice! What’s different about getting the edge intellectually and is that cheating? Maybe the fact that we could all join in means it’s not quite cheating. But then many people may not want to take such substances (I have never taken a mind-enhancing drug in my life and have no intention of doing so, even to keep up with the herd); are we not being left at a disadvantage?

A big story broke this week with discussion of the ethical use of brain boosting drugs (known imposingly as “cognitive enhancement” drugs). The row was triggered by an editorial in the prestigious journal; Nature (Dec 11th 2008), calling for the freedom to take such substances. Nature, a very “upmarket” science journal, had polled its readers and found 20% of top scientists already took cognitive enhancement substances. Studies have already suggested that between 5% and 15% of college students use brain-boosting drugs, mostly Ritalin or Adderall. Banned street drugs, such as marijuana, ecstasy and LSD are also “cognitive enhancement” substances, remember. So the outcry is understandable. Even if the must-meddle-in-other-peoples-freedoms crowd had failed to notice and get involved, the how-do-we-know-its-safe group, which includes me, might want to express their concerns. Then there is the issue of “Is it fair?” Are people who take drug enhancements not leap-frogging over everyone else? We ban sports performers from doing that because it’s considered not quite nice! What’s different about getting the edge intellectually and is that cheating? Maybe the fact that we could all join in means it’s not quite cheating. But then many people may not want to take such substances (I have never taken a mind-enhancing drug in my life and have no intention of doing so, even to keep up with the herd); are we not being left at a disadvantage?