The Neuroscience Center

neuroethics - the intersection of neuroscience, philosophy and ethics.

 

discoveries about the

brain affect our sense of ourselves as human beings (such as the neural basis of morality).

implications for social policy (such as a child’s educational potential)

how research is itself conducted (such as the ethics of animal experimentation or the use of deception with human subjects).

 

Socially

17th C, Descartes used a hydraulic metaphor to explain how the “humours” of the brain moved the muscles - a metaphor borrowed from the water engineering he saw in the gardens of French chateaux.

20th C, reflecting the industrial age, neurophysiologists described the intricate wiring of the brain as “an enchanted loom” or later as a giant “telephone exchange”.

21st C, computational metaphors abound, such as the fanciful speculation that “the cerebral cortex operates not unlike a private world wide web”.

 

Medication- Related

smart drugs that may help us remember better.

any difference between this and an athlete using steroids to improve their performance or a person taking an anti-depressant?

neurotoxins (nerve agents) that disrupt this critical process, such as enzyme inhibitors that are but a step from the agents of biological warfare.

 

Brain Imaging- Related

cognitive privacy

courts use cerebral fingerprint to find lies

distinguish a person’s real memories from their false ones

 

Who are we?

New findings about the brain are all the time revising our sense of ourselves.

Influential ideas about the evolution of the brain include many related to social cognition.

 

evolutionary ethics

morality and conscience are closely coupled to the emotional brain that processes signals of reward and punishment – a possibility that some have argued under the rubric of evolutionary ethics.

 

Ideas of plsticity could reform education beyond present immediate academic goals

 

molecular neurobiologists

ultimate truth lies embedded in the molecular constituents of the nervous system - with new DNA and proteomic technologies promising fuller explanations of the brain that will finesse the problems faced by other neuroscientists. This is the reductionist agenda

philosophical and technological flowering is so often celebrated in media accounts.

 

Are there emergent properties arising from the brain’s organization? Interactionist neuroscientists firmly believe in a different agenda. They argue for a more eclectic approach to modern neuroscience, an approach that explores its interaction with the social sciences as well.

questions about what sorts of research should be undertaken are matters about which society should be consulted.

peoples taxes pay for it

 

Topic #1: Informed Consent

Situation #1: should the subject be told?

a subject is found to have a tumor or prone to a disease. Should the subject be told?

Based off of the premise that s/he was consulted and asked to offer/decline whether it should be revealed

 

Situation #2: Dare we abandon informed consent and introduce waivers, for the greater good?

Research for Stroke meds require to be administered soon after the attack. How do we predict a stroke well enough to recieve informed consent?  it would possibly help the patient and many others is s/he did take it. Relatives might not be in a state of mind to agree or disagree.

 

Topic #2: Animal Experiments

Situation #1: Animals don't provide informed consent.

Some: disturbing; Others: yes, we need scientific research. most European countries, researchers must be tested on the law and ways to ensure animals don't suffer. 3R's:reduction, refinement and replacement. replacement techniques: tissue culture and computational modelling. Not all research can be defined as such, ex. L-DOPA to treat Parkinson’s disease emerged from Nobel Prize winning work on the rat brain.

 

Topic #3: Public speaking

correlation is not the same as causation. Instead of focusing on isolated discoveries, the media would do well to think more about science as a process. A process riddled with uncertainty and debate.