Another take on the Oklahoma Conference

One of the many surprising aspects of the Oklahoma conference this year was the frequent discussion of technology. As Elizabeth observed, Meghan Ryan spoke of "scientific management" of criminal behavior. Lisa is referring to Meghan's useful description of the impact of new neuroanatomy for understanding and manipulating brain function and the challenges it poses in the criminal law area. Elizabeth didn't point out that Jeff Pojanowski referred to artificial intelligence and the post-human future in his talk. Steven Smith mentioned these aspects of Meghan's and Jeff's talks in his comments.

These challenging new developments portend many social problems that will  become critical in the next few decades. As Rick suggests, conceptions of the person hold significance for moral issues because often these turn on questions about what human beings do, how they reason, and what resources they have available to alter themselves and their environment. Technologies that alter our understanding of person and allow for manipulation of personality will be among the most contentious because the go right to the core conception of what it is to be human.

Engaging others who have commitments to abstract conceptions of moral value that differ from substantially from those of Catholics was a central theme in the conference. For me, an important thought to emerge from our discussions, particularly following Elizabeth's presentation, was that one ought not engage others at levels of abstraction that exceed what is necessary for resolving immediate disputes. Which is to say, that since comprehensive normative claims about the person are not relevant to every dispute, prudential judgement should be employed to resolve disagreements without reference to them. 

But, this suggests that the types of issues raised by the neuroscience and post-human issues that Meghan and Jeff pointed out are likely to be the most contentious in the future. Brain imaging technology and the ability to manipulate the mind through surgical and pharmacological intervention contributes immensely to the treatment of persons suffering from brain injury, disease, and mental illness. And, these treatments are of great moral worth. These technologies challenge the Catholic understanding of the person precisely because they sweep away what have been mysterious aspects of the mind. There seems little doubt that our understanding of the person will be enhanced by this work in the natural sciences, and yet it will challenge traditional understanding of the dignity and moral worth of the person.

I believe, as John Breen noted in his excellent presentation, that the Catholic faith has much to offer in guiding reason to wisdom. But, the future looks complex and challenging.