John Harris argues it would not be wrong to use cognition
enhancing drugs such as Ritalin in order to obtain good grades in examinations
(1). Prima facie it would appear the taking of such drugs, provided these drugs
have no adverse side effects, would be an enhancement to the drug user as they
appear to increase his cognitive abilities. It seems to me in practice the
question as to whether it would be wrong to use cognition enhancing drugs in
the context of examinations is not as straightforward as Harris believes. Let
it be accepted that the use of cognition enhancing drugs to enhance someone’s
cognition will allow him to obtain a better grade in an examination. I now want
to question whether such an enhancement should be permissible.
Let it be accepted that an enhancement should not be
permissible if it denies to others the goods they are rightfully entitled to.
Does the fact that some candidate might improve his grade in an examination by
the use of cognition enhancing drugs, whilst others do not take these drugs,
potentially deny these others some goods they are entitled to? In order to
answer this question we must first consider the purpose of an examination. This
purpose is not simply to assess someone’s ability to pass an examination. The
purpose of an examination might be defined as an attempt to assess someone’s
proficiency in some subject which depends on his cognitive abilities in much
the same way as a driving test tests someone’s proficiency to drive a car. An
examination might be defined as a test of someone’s knowledge and cognitive
abilities. The above definition still needs some further refinement. In an
examination the attempt to assess someone’s proficiency takes place at time T.
However the purpose of this assessment is not simply to gauge a candidate’s
proficiency at time T. The purpose of an examination might be defined as an
attempt to assess someone’s proficiency over an ongoing period of time.
Examinations would clearly be pointless if candidates immediately lost all
proficiency in the subject examined after the examination. Consider two
candidates A and B taking some examination. Let it be assumed A takes cognition
enhancing drugs in an attempt to improve his grade whilst B doesn’t. Let it be
further assumed A is successful in obtaining a better grade in the examination
than B and as a result obtains a better position than B. Let it be still
further assumed that A’s stops taking the cognitive enhancing drugs after the
examination and that his proficiency drops to below that of B. Prima facie it appears
B has been deprived of some good he is entitled to. It follows that the
possibility of using of cognition enhancing drugs in examinations might deny
candidates who do not take these drugs the goods they are entitled to.
The above conclusion seems to depend on two factors.
Firstly A’s use of cognition enhancing drugs in the examination does not
enhance his proficiency in the subject examined in an ongoing way. Secondly his
use similarly fails to enhance his cognitive abilities. Both these factors seem
plausible. Taking aspirin after all only relieves pain for a limited period.
Moreover it also seems reasonable to assume if someone stops taking cognitive
enhancing drugs his cognitive abilities fall. If his abilities did not fall
then it might be questioned whether the drugs concerned were really cognitive
enhancing.
However even if both of these factors are true it does not
automatically mean A’s use of cognition enhancing drugs denies B some goods he
might be entitled to in all circumstances. Firstly A might continue to take
cognition enhancing drugs after passing the examination. In these circumstances
the fact he took these drugs in order to do well in the examination does
deprive B of any goods he is rightfully entitled to. Furthermore provided
someone’s continuing taking of these drugs has no long term adverse effects it
again seems plausible A will continue to do so. After all some people after all
continue to take a daily aspirin in order to reduce the possibility of heart
attacks and strokes. It would seem in these circumstances the use of cognition
enhancing drugs becomes a genuine enhancement and not one limited to the
context of passing examinations. Secondly the taking of cognition enhancing
drugs for a short period leads to cognition enhancement in the long term. I
find this possibility unlikely. It follows that the use of cognition enhancing
drugs in examinations ought to be permissible provided one or both of the two
following conditions holds.
- The short term use of cognition enhancing drugs by a candidate in an examination either increases his proficiency in the subject examined or his cognitive abilities in an ongoing way.
- Any candidate using cognition enhancing drugs in an examination must continue to use these drugs.
It might be objected that in practice the first condition
is unlikely to hold. I accept this objection. It is also possible to object to
my second condition. My objector might argue that it would seem to be
impossible to ascertain whether someone would continue taking cognitive
enhancing drugs after his examination. If someone fails to continue taking
these drugs then the results of the examination will provide an inaccurate
assessment of someone’s proficiency over an ongoing period of time. My objector
might then conclude if cognition enhancing drugs are permitted in examinations
that the value of examinations is devalued. However I would suggest that
subject to the condition that the use of a cognition enhancing drug has no
adverse side effects, it seems probable that anyone who benefits from this drug
would continue to take it. To stop doing something which benefits someone and
which does him no harm would seem to be illogical. It follows the second
condition listed above should normally hold. It further follows Harris is
correct to argue it should be permissible for someone to use cognition
enhancing drugs in an examination provided those drugs benefit the users if
taken in the long term and doing them no harm.
- John Harris, 2007, Enhancing Evolution, Princeton University Press
