Brain implants to alleviate an ailment or to provide optimal human level performance are approved of, but are not accepted to gain superhuman performance (unless you are a science fiction fan)

Koverola, Mika, Anton Kunnari, Marianna Drosinou, Jussi Palomäki, Ivar Hannikainen, Jukka Sundvall, and Michael Laakasuo. 2020. “Non-Human Superhumans - Moral Psychology of Brain Implants: Exploring the Role of Situational Factors, Science Fiction Exposure, Individual Differences and Perceived Norms.” PsyArXiv. June 30. doi:10.31234/osf.io/qgz9c

Abstract: Through five experimental studies we measured moral reactions to brain implants. We used three different measurements: 1) moral approval, or the general acceptance of brain-enhancing implants and people getting such implants, 2) perceived unfairness of the enhancement and 3) dehumanization of persons using brain implants. In our vignettes, the enhancement was on one of three levels: a) it alleviated an ailment, b) it gave optimal human level performance or c) it gave superhuman performance. Studies 1 to 4 were about memory enhancement, Study 5A about enhancing general intelligence and Study 5B about enhancing emotional stability.
We successfully showed that moral approval, sense of fairness and dehumanization are relevant in contexts where moral implications of new technologies are being evaluated and that while people generally approve of curing ailments, they are more cautious of unfamiliar levels of enhancement. Furthermore, we linked the tendency to condemn transhumanist technologies to factors associated with disgust sensitivity (the binding orientation of the Moral Foundations Theory and sexual disgust) and found that science fiction hobbyism is linked to approval of brain implants. We also successfully ruled out possible idiosyncrasies associated with our stimulus materials and eliminated multiple alternative explanations common in the study of moral cognition.