In Defense of Neural Disenhancement to Promote Animal Welfare

Abstract

I argue that animal welfare advocates don’t act wrongly if they promote research into ways of neurally disenhancing animals. More precisely, I contend that even if we conclude that it’s wrong to disenhance animals because it’s the wrong kind of solution to the situation that we’ve created, the considerations in its favor make it permissible for animal welfare advocates to support its development and use for the time being. This is because total suffering is likely to be substantially worse without such research; because disenhancement is not as bad, morally speaking, as it can initially seem to be; and because it’s a promising way of mitigating the risks involved in not disenhancing animals.