Hastings Center Report 45 (6):26-35 (2015)
AbstractNeural engineering technologies such as implanted deep brain stimulators and brain-computer interfaces represent exciting and potentially transformative tools for improving human health and well-being. Yet their current use and future prospects raise a variety of ethical and philosophical concerns. Devices that alter brain function invite us to think deeply about a range of ethical concerns—identity, normality, authority, responsibility, privacy, and justice. If a device is stimulating my brain while I decide upon an action, am I still the author of the action? Does a device make the interiority of my experience accessible to others? Will the device change the way I think of myself and others think of me? Such fundamental questions arise even when a device is designed for only a relatively circumscribed purpose, such as restoring functioning via a smart prosthetic. We are part of a National Science Foundation-funded Engineering Research Center tasked with investigating philosophical and social implications of neural engineering research and technologies. Neural devices already in clinical use, such as deep brain stimulators for Parkinson's disease or essential tremor, have spurred healthy debate about such implications. Devices currently under development—such as the BrainGate System of implanted brain sensors coupled to robotics in persons with paralysis, exoskeletons for augmented movement, transcranial do-it-yourself stimulators, closed-loop brain stimulating systems, or even brain-to-brain interfacing—promise to extend and deepen these debates. At our center, brain-computer interfaces are the principal focus of work. Even acknowledging that the clinical translation of neural devices and seamless integration by end users may still largely reside in the future, the potential these devices hold calls for careful early analysis. The launching of the Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies Initiative in April 2013 provides further impetus for this work
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
The Ethics of Digital Well-Being: A Thematic Review.Christopher Burr, Mariarosaria Taddeo & Luciano Floridi - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26:2313–2343.
The Ethics of Digital Well-Being: A Thematic Review.Christopher Burr, Mariarosaria Taddeo & Luciano Floridi - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2313–2343.
Staying in the Loop: Relational Agency and Identity in Next-Generation DBS for Psychiatry.Sara Goering, Eran Klein, Darin D. Dougherty & Alik S. Widge - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 8 (2):59-70.
Embodiment and Estrangement: Results From a First-in-Human “Intelligent BCI” Trial.F. Gilbert, M. Cook, T. O’Brien & J. Illes - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (1):83-96.
Ethical Aspects of Brain Computer Interfaces: A Scoping Review.Sasha Burwell, Matthew Sample & Eric Racine - 2017 - BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1):60.
Similar books and articles
Neural Technologies: The Ethics of Intimate Access to the Mind.Ronald M. Green - 2015 - Hastings Center Report 45 (6):36-37.
Bonding Brains to Machines: Ethical Implications of Electroceuticals for the Human Brain.Jens Clausen - 2013 - Neuroethics 6 (3):429-434.
The Brain-Mind Quiddity: Ethical Issues in the Use of Human Brain Tissue for Therapeutic and Scientific Purposes.L. Burd, J. M. Gregory & J. Kerbeshian - 1998 - Journal of Medical Ethics 24 (2):118-122.
Brain-Computer Interaction and Medical Access to the Brain: Individual, Social and Ethical Implications.Elisabeth Hildt - 2010 - Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4 (3).
Taking Care of One’s Brain: How Manipulating the Brain Changes People’s Selves.Jonna Brenninkmeijer - 2010 - History of the Human Sciences 23 (1):107-126.
Consciousness in Mixed Systems: Merging Artificial and Biological Minds Via Brain-Machine Interface.Alexandra Elbakyan - unknown
The Mind and the Machine. On the Conceptual and Moral Implications of Brain-Machine Interaction.Maartje Schermer - 2009 - NanoEthics 3 (3):217-230.
Becoming Borg to Become Immortal: Regulating Brain Implant Technologies.Ellen M. Mcgee & Gerald Q. Maguire - 2007 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 16 (3):291-302.
Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of Brain-Implants Using Nano-Scale Materials and Techniques.Francois Berger, Sjef Gevers, Ludwig Siep & Klaus-Michael Weltring - 2008 - NanoEthics 2 (3):241-249.
Did I Do That? Brain–Computer Interfacing and the Sense of Agency.Pim Haselager - 2013 - Minds and Machines 23 (3):405-418.
The Regulation of Cognitive Enhancement Devices : Extending the Medical Model.Hannah Maslen, Thomas Douglas, Roi Cohen Kadosh, Neil Levy & Julian Savulescu - 2014 - Journal of Law and the Biosciences 1 (1):68-93.
Recipe for a Sexually Dimorphic Brain: Ingredients Include Ovarian and Testicular Hormones.Diane F. Halpern - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):330-331.