Neuroethics

Ethics

Definition: Two interrelated disciplines: the ethical, societal, and legal implications of neuroscience, and the cognitive basis for ethics and moral behavior.

Key terms:

brain-machine interface: direct communication between a living brain and a computer or other external device

neuroenhancement: drugs or therapies that improve or modify cognition

neuroimaging: a category of research techniques that produce images of brain anatomy and/or activity

psychopathy: a class of behavioral disorders characterized by a lack of remorse and empathy, antisocial behavior, and poor self-control

Science and Profession

The easiest definition of neuroethics is “the neuroscience of ethics, and the ethics of neuroscience.” While this is perhaps too glib, it encapsulates the dual nature of the discipline—one that allows professionals from many disciplines to fit under the “neuroethics” umbrella. Neuroethicists range in profession from lawyers to policymakers, with concentrations in neuroscience and philosophy.

Legal teams often consult with neuroethicists about the use of neuroscience in the courtroom, especially as it pertains to personal responsibility. Some have argued that the neurological basis of morality should play a role in how offenders are prosecuted and treated. Using neuroimaging as a lie detector test has been widely debated, although it has been largely dismissed from American courts.

Neuroethicists also influence public policy about the ethical use of neuroscientific information and research, sitting on panels such as the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues.

Doctors and neuroscientists are frequently confronted with neuroethical questions. In the course of their research, scientists may discover unexpected health information, such as a predisposition to a progressive neurological disorder. They must then decide whether to disclose this information to the subject. Patients also regularly ask their physicians for prescriptions to drugs with off-label uses as neuroenhancers, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and narcolepsy medications.

A number of major universities now have departments exclusively dedicated to neuroethics. They generally grant master's degrees and PhDs in the discipline. There are also two peer-reviewed neuroethics journals, Neuroethics and the American Journal of Bioethics-Neuroscience (AJOB-Neuro).

Perspective and Prospects

Both neuroscience ethics and the cognitive basis for morality have a long tradition in medicine, as well as in law and philosophy. However, neuroethics as a defined field can be traced back to a Dana Foundation meeting called “Neuroethics: Mapping the Field.” The proceedings of this meeting were published in a book that has become a widely-used reference guide.

Some neuroethics topics are simply bioethical issues that are specific to neuroscience. The idea of “brain doping,” sometimes called cosmetic pharmacology, taps into the wider discussion of improving performance in healthy people, although there is the added dimension of personhood and morality. Because of these additional layers, neuroethics can diverge widely from traditional biomedical ethics to include issues of the self and identity.

For instance, some neuroethicists have discussed a “morality pill,” a theoretical pill that could make a person more likely to adhere to a given set of ethics (such as giving a psychopath a treatment for empathy). Many mental illnesses or personality disorders might be treatable with direct intervention, but potential loss of memory or personality must be weighed against the benefits.

The use of brain scans in the courtroom is often a cause for controversy. Some data shows a correlation between psychopathy and specific patterns of brain activity or anatomy. Similarly, traumatic brain injury (TBI), which can cause such mental impairments as depression, impulsivity, and poor affect control, has been on the rise, and criminal cases involving TBI have relied on neurological imaging evidence in mitigating or even exculpating affected individuals. Such findings raise a discussion of biology versus responsibility. If a person is biologically incapable of controlling their impulses, are they still legally responsible for their actions?

The growing use of brain-machine interfaces is another ripe topic for discussion. Brain implants have been used to restore vision to the blind, while gamers can don special headsets to turn brainwaves into screen action. Each use of a brain-machine interface requires a risk-benefit analysis. Is the implant safe enough? Will “mind-reading” devices violate privacy? Neuroethicists have even been called on to discuss the use of mind reading in police or military interrogations.

Another area of neuroethical concern is morality and religious ethics. Some religious adherents worry that neuroimaging technology may violate precepts of their faith, such as the privacy of spiritual thoughts in Islam. Others fear that cognitive neuroscience will supplant organized religion altogether by demonstrating an inherent biological basis for moral thinking and behavior. Still others see possibilities for human healing and transformation, aligned with scripture, in brain-machine interfaces. Some neuroethicists have called for certain religious beliefs on the nature of consciousness and understandings of ethics, such as compassion and empathy, to inform, and perhaps even temper, future neuroscientific research.

Future neuroethical discussions will likely focus on access to and use of new, better neuroenhancement techniques, and privacy issues arising from the use of neuroscience in marketing, law, and medical treatment.

Bibliography

Aggarwal, Neil Krishan, and Elizabeth Ford. "The Neuroethics and Neurolaw of Brain Injury." Behavioral Sciences & the Law 31, no. 6 (November 2013): 789–802.

Al-Delaimy, Wael. "Ethical Concepts and Future Challenges of Neuroimaging: An Islamic Perspective." Science & Engineering Ethics 18, no. 3 (September 2012): 509–518.

Churchland, Patricia. Braintrust: What Neuroscience Tells Us about Morality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011.

Farah, Martha J., ed.Neuroethics: An Introduction with Readings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010.

Gazzaniga, Michael. The Ethical Brain. New York: Dana Press, 2005.

Glannon, Walter. Bioethics and the Brain. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Illes, Judy, and Barbara J. Sahakian, eds. Oxford Handbook of Neuroethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Levy, Neil. Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Marcus, Steven J., ed. Neuroethics: Mapping the Field. New York: Dana Press, 2004.

Sahakian, Barbara, and Jamie N. LaBuzetta. Bad Moves: How Decision Making Goes Wrong and the Ethics of Smart Drugs. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.

Tsomo, Karma. "Compassion, Ethics, and Neuroscience: Neuroethics Through Buddhist Eyes." Science & Engineering Ethics 18, no. 3 (September 2012): 529–537.