Brain Enhancement is Wrong, Right - Analysis
According to Benedict Carey, taking pills to enhance performance in academia is flourishing. Throughout his argument he talks about how individuals are using pills such as Adderall or Provigil to help boost one’s abilities. In his perspective he sees taking stimulants as a horrendous problem within the academic field. The problem with his argument is he is not staying open minded; he stayed in a complete narrow mindset weakening his argument against pills being taken to improve academic success.
In “Brain Enhancement is Wrong, Right?” the point being conveyed is that using stimulants to enhance performance should not be used because stimulants are unethical. The author intends to reach out to researchers, professors, and college students as the predominant demographic. The usage of drugs to enhance abilities occurs during time when individuals have stressful tasks a head of them. The use of the stimulants depends on when the person needs to focus. Benedict Carey targeted individuals in the academic field because those are the people who are using stimulants to amplify their abilities.
Benedict Carey writes, “An era of doping may be looming in academia.” Within this statement, he qualified the statement by saying, “[D]oping
…show more content…
may be looming . . . . [Emphasis added]” He is not saying that doping is definitely looming in academia; he is just stating that doping in academia is becoming more apparent than it once was. Researchers from Cambridge University reported that around a dozen of colleagues use stimulants regularly.
Carey stated how he believed those who are in an academic setting are more likely to be using substances to enhance their cognitive abilities. Within his articles he supported his claim by using an authority perspective. He used quotes from “our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution” by Francis Fukuyama, quotes from Dr. Nora Volkow (who is a director for National Institution on Drug Abuse), and he quoted Martha Farah (director of Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at the University of Pennsylvania), all of who are of high prestige for the topic Carey is
communicating. Carey attempted to take a logical appeal in his article. Logically, almost everyone knows that certain drugs are not good for them and that they should not take that drug, but in this case, the drug is helping them focus and stay alert. He argues that in the future people will rely heavily on prescription drugs to help someone concentrate. “[Prescription drugs such as Adderall and Provigil are] more widely available, than drugs circulating in dorms a generation ago.” In society now, getting prescription drugs from a doctor or another fellow student is very obtainable; all someone has to do is say, they are having trouble staying focused and they are easily distracted and they will get some sort of pill to help them focus. Carey’s argument is a slippery slope. He suggest that because some people use a stimulant to help keep them focused and alert, that in the future people will not be able to function without the help of a stimulant. As Carey wrote his argument, he failed to engage in counterargument. No point was made about what others on the opposing side think about using stimulants to help with academic performance. To make his argument stronger, he should have listed more reasons as to why he believes the stimulants is an obscene idea. He only sees the negative of what prescription drugs can do to help individuals. Take college students for instance, they generally have fifteen credit hours and at least half of them work on the side. To obtain the grades that he or she wants and to be able to support themselves somewhat, some may need an extra boost to keep them going. Using that as an example could have made his article better because it is another perspective. He suggests that stimulants become more in favor when preparing for job interviews or taking college entrance exams. The author supports his claims well, but falls short with offering a rebuttal. He does state that stimulants such as Adderall make individuals feel more awake and alert. That is all Carey gives the readers. He does not imply how prescription stimulants can be beneficial, or harmful to people. He does not offer support that, yes Adderall makes people feel a certain way, but the drug may also have some side effects that can affect a person’s life in other aspects. Sure the drug helps people stay more focused on the task at hand, but what about the possible side effect of not being able to sleep at night or headaches. Within the article, readers will pick up that stimulants being used to help performance in and academic setting is similar to professional athletes taking steroids to enhance their performance. In a sense he is saying that steroids and prescription stimulants are the same thing. Steroids and prescription stimulants are two totally different substances. Athletes are held on a high pedestal that they can do no wrong. They are thought to be the gods sent to us, so people can watch them do remarkable things. Steroids are used to help athletes keep their endurance up and build muscle. Prescription stimulants on the other hand are not well known or talked about because regular everyday people use them to help them stay focused on their work. Steroids are used to produce and outcome that is phony while prescription stimulants are used to help enhance a person’s drive and focus. As Carey was arguing his point, he referred to taking prescription stimulants as doping. Taking a pill to help on e stay awake and focused is not the same as someone taking a pill to build muscles so they can perform better in an athletic event. Some individuals need the extra push from a pill to help them concentrate. There will always be two sides to every argument, but the best ways to win an argument is knowing how to rebut others view points. “Brain Enhancement is Wrong, Right?” was not a well-written argument. The author focused on his narrow-minded viewpoint, therefore, he failed to get the big picture of why individuals use stimulants in an academic setting. His purpose of his article was to get others to agree with his one-sided viewpoint.
In Margaret Talbot 's article about neuroenhancing drugs, she uses tone, appeals, and evidence from various sources. Talbot also utilized stories from past students that had used these drugs to enhance their academic performance, along with their work ethic, because they felt they needed an academic aid. Throughout this article, Talbot is trying to inform our society of the effects of neuroenhancing drugs, as well as get her point across about how she feels about this issue. She uses evidence from past college students that displays her opinion on the use of these drugs for nonmedicinal use. According to her writing, the use of these drugs is becoming more widespread than it should. In my analysis I will focus on how Talbot uses these strategies
"The risks become more pronounced if students use stimulants concurrently with other substances", (Underhill & Langdon, 2013, p.
Another persuasive technique we used was appealing to dramatic benefits of the post-treatment of adderall by having a student imitate exaggerated behaviors of short attention span and impulsive nature that resulted in poor grades. Then after the same student takes adderall, he portrays a completely different character and becomes very attentive and productive in his studies, which results to an A in his next assignment. This is critical in Singh’s “Not Just Naughty: 50 years of stimulant drug advertising”, as he emphasizes how drug advertisements commonly present a post-treatment normal reality of highly idealized “portrait of an ideal family—bright, at...
In a 2012 study published by the Journal of American College Health, by senior year, Adderall and other prescription stimulants are offered to two-thirds of college students. Furthermore, about 31 percent are taking the drug in hopes to enhance their concentration to get better grades (Zadrozny 2013). Students who take Adderall that don’t have ADHD report that they have a increased sense of focus, motivation, and concentration, which are all the ingredients you need to have for a successful all-nighter to help on providing an added boost before an exam. With characteristics such as difficulties in focusing, reasoning, problem solving and planning, ADHD is a neurobehavioral-based disorder and is associated with an insufficient amount of dopamine (Student Health: Drug & Alcohol Abuse among College Students 2015). Adderall is enticing to students because they believe it can help them perform enhance their academic skills. On the other hand, some students abuse the drug because simply for the high it gives
Jost, Kenneth. "Performance-Enhancing Drugs: An Overview." Performance Enhancing Drugs. Ed. Louise Gerdes. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. At Issue. Rpt. from "Sports and Drugs." CQ Researcher 14 (23 July 2004): 616-622. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 31 Jan. 2014.
In the article “Brain Gain: The Underground World of “Neuroenhancing” Drugs” (Yorker 2009) Margaret Talbot discusses the misuse of prescription drugs that enhance academic performance at the college level. First Talbot introduces readers to a young college history major at Harvard University named Alex who receives a description of a demanding, busy life which seems impossible to control without the safety unapproved adopted use of a drug named Adderall. After that Alex’s dependency on the prescription drugs cognitive enhancers is described when he asks his doctor to increase the amount of intake and the listing of his daily routine on using Adderall during a week that required him to write four term papers. Next Talbot describes a personal
College can be a challenge with endless papers, tests, and other tasks. A pill that allows extreme focus helps accomplish necessary tasks. Adderall is a prescription medication given to patients with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Jaffe). However, this drug has become known as a “smart drug” around college campuses (“Daily News & Analysis”). About 6.4 percent of college students have taken Adderall without a prescription (Carver). At more competitive schools, about twenty-five percent of students have taken Adderall (Pantovich). Students take the drug with hope to improve a grade. However, in the long run, the student only hurts himself or herself.
Using technology can have certain effects on the brain. Nicholas Carr’s magazine blog, “The Web Shatters Focus, Rewrites Brains,” tells us an experiment from a ULCA professor, Gary Small. Gary Small
Workman, Thomas A., and Gregory Eells. "Assessing the Risks and Issues: Prescription Drug Abuse on Campus." Stetson University. N.p., 2010. Web. 17 Nov. 2013. .
The altered states of consciousness produced by drugs presents an all-to-common phenomenon in today’s society. Whether the desired sensation comes in the form of energy, a means of relaxation, or pain reduction, many people go to great lengths and present their bodies to threatening conditions in order to achieve this euphoric “high.” Unfortunately, the use of these drugs very often comes with dangerous side effects that users must learn to manage with for the rest of their life. According to neuroscientists, our entire conscious existence bases itself off of the lighting-fast reactions occurring in our nervous system (Nichols, 2012). Therefore, changing these neurological reactions can permanently effect our conscious being (Blatter, 2012). The physical and neurological effects from the use and abuse of stimulants, sedatives, hallucinogens, organic solvents, and athletic performance enhancing drugs will be discussed in order to better comprehend why certain individuals expose themselves to such dangerous materials with seemingly no regard to the permanent consequences associated with such actions.
..., Kjetil K. "Why We Shouldn’t Allow Performance Enhancing Drugs in Sport." Academia.edu. Academia.edu, 1 Apr. 2011. Web. 06 Jan. 2014. .
Drug use in sports is considered cheating. Doping has many historical backgrounds, but now it is on a larger scale in order to maximiz...
...thlete under twenty-four hour surveillance is neither feasible nor lawful. Only when there are more accurate tests can the enforcement of drug rules and regulations be possible. As more sophisticated tests come to market, fewer drugs will escape detection. With the limited ability of current techniques to catch athletes red-handed, pressure must be put on the athletic community to reject doping. Until the athletic community refuses doping as a means to an end, little can be done to stop it from happening.
Many students and young people trying to leave marks on their jobs now use brain-enhancing "smart" pills to help boost their exam grades or their ability to work long hours without tiring. It's quite possible that employers will start to demand that employees use stimulants. Drugs, originally made for dementia patients and children diagnosed with ADHD, are now available without prescription. Healthy individuals use them solely to improve their memory, motivation and attention, without any prior consult with their doctors. Many of these drugs are available on the Internet which comes in handy to young people who want to save their money for the future. What they do not take into consideration when buying stimulants on the Internet is the risk of not knowing for certain what they are getting. Moreover, long-term consequences and safety of the technologies are not known. Scientists haven’t done enough research to know how much of an impact even a short period of using such substances leaves on our brains.
The usage of performance-enhancing drugs in sports is commonly known as Doping. Doping is banned worldwide in every sports administration and competitions and doping gives an unfair advantage to those using illegal substances, such as steroids to boost their performance. It also puts at stake the integrity of those athletes who do not use performance-enhancing drugs also known as “clean” athletes. In fact it seems that we’re now entering the era of performance-enhancing drugs within professional sports. Doping rids the true athletes of what they truly deserve and is wrong; because why should those who put in a hundred per cent of their effort, be outshone by individuals who are choosing to use substances to enhance their physical and mental abilities? Doping damages the sports industry as a whole because it has a serious physical and mental effects on the athletes, as well as damaging the idea of sportsmanship and it also breaks the trust of the fans, as they realise their idols are hypocrites.