In this article, we critically discuss different versions of the fairness objection to the legalisation of neuro-doping. According to this objection, legalising neuro-doping will result in some enjoying an unfair advantage over others. Basically, we assess four versions. These focus on: 1) the unequal opportunities of winning for athletes who use neuro-doping and for those who do not; 2) the unfair advantages specifically for wealthy athletes; 3) the unfairness of athletic advantages not derived from athletes’ own training (conventionally understood); and 4) the unfair health care costs imposed on everyone as a result of athletes’ use of neuro-doping. We conclude that none of these versions offer a convincing principled fairness-based objection to legalising neuro-doping.

在本文中，我们批判性地讨论了反对神经兴奋剂合法化的公平反对的不同版本。根据这一反对意见，使神经兴奋剂合法化将导致某些人享有相对于其他人的不公平优势。基本上，我们评估四个版本。这些重点在于：1）使用神经兴奋剂的运动员和不使用神经兴奋剂的运动员有不平等的获胜机会；2）专门针对富裕运动员的不公平优势；3）并非来自运动员自身训练产生的运动优势的不公平（传统意义上）；4）由于运动员使用神经兴奋剂而给每个人带来的不公平的医疗保健费用。我们得出的结论是，这些版本均未提供令人信服的基于原则的基于公平性的反对意见，以使神经兴奋剂合法化。