Citizen Centric Governance

2nd ARC Report

Neuroethics

Neuroscience is making discoveries about the brain at an incredible pace. For example, new drugs and treatments for mental and neurological disorders are being developed rapidly and imaging methods can see the living, working brain. Is neuroscience moving too fast? What can and should be done with this new knowledge about the brain? These are questions that concern workers in the field called Neuroethics.

Scientists, physicians, journalists, lawyers, politicians, philosophers, clergymen and teachers are people interested in neuroethics. But we should all be interested in neuroethics because this field will impact many aspects of our daily lives. Some neuroethical issues sound like science fiction, but other issues deal with technology and drugs that are currently available. There is no turning back. Neuroscientific discoveries will continue to be made and it is best to discuss these issues before they become reality.

Neuroethics - Some Questions

What if... machines could read your mind?

Existing brain imaging methods provide researchers and physicians with important tools to investigate the structure and function of the living brain. These powerful techniques help detect abnormalities in the brain and can assist in the diagnosis of neurological and mental disorders. Brain imaging is also used in experiments to study emotions, language and perception.

Could machines also read your thoughts, plans and memories? We currently have a machine called the polygraph (sometimes called a lie detector). The polygraph records involuntary physiological responses such as heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate and sweating to see if people are lying. However, the accuracy of the polygraph for detecting lies is controversial and some people can be trained to fool the machine. Could a machine that measures brain activity detect lying accurately?

Inventors of a "brain fingerprinting" machine think they have a device that can reveal a person's knowledge of events. Brain fingerprinting measures the electrical activity of the brain through electrodes attached to the scalp. Specific stimuli (words, pictures or sounds) are presented to a person. Some of the stimuli are important to an investigation, such as a crime scene. These important stimuli are thought to produce a special brain response that indicates that the person knows something about the stimulus. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which measures brain blood flow, may also be able to detect areas of the brain that are active when a person lies. Two companies, No Lie MRI and Cephos Corp, are already marketing a service to detect lying.

If a device could accurately measure hidden knowledge and detect lies, how could and should it be used?

• Should people suspected of committing a crime be forced to have a brain scan? ("Did you steal the money?")
• Should suspected terrorists be brain scanned? ("Do you belong to a terrorist group?")
• Would employers be within their rights to have their employees undergo a brain scan? ("Can you be trusted with our company secrets?")
• Should people use brain scans on their spouses and children? ("Were you at the game last night?")
• If brain imaging could measure morality or intent, should it be used? ("Do you plan to rob the store?")
• If a brain scan could measure talents such as musical or mathematical ability, should it be used to direct people toward or away from certain jobs?

Memories are very fragile and can change over time. Would such a brain scan be able to detect "false memories" or memories that people believe to be true, but are not true? In specific experimental situations, some brain areas (the posterior medial temporal lobe) do respond differently to true memories and false memories.

What if... machines could predict a future neurological or mental disease?

Brain imaging can identify structural and functional differences in people with various neurological and mental disorders. For example, magnetic resonance imaging has shown that people with schizophrenia have larger than normal lateral ventricles, reduced hippocampus size, changes in the size of basal ganglia nuclei, and abnormalities in the prefrontal cortex. Currently, genetic testing can be used to screen for particular illnesses, such as Huntington's disease. Perhaps a brain scan will enable detection of other neurological and mental disorders.

• What if a machine or test could predict a disorder before any symptoms were present, perhaps even before a baby is born?
• Would you want to know if you were going to have a neurological or mental disorder?
• Should people be forced to get treatment to avoid problems of their condition?
• Should insurance companies require a brain scan before they issue a health policy? 

What if... drugs could alter your personality?

Drugs that alter mood are already available. Antidepressants and tranquilizers are used by millions of people every day: people with schizophrenia are treated with antipsychotics; children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are treated with stimulants. In the future, drugs might alter a specific personality characteristic. For example, perhaps a drug could be made to fight shyness.

• If a drug could reduce aggression, should it be given to people convicted of violent crimes?
• Could and should a pill be developed to eliminate specific phobias, such as the fear of flying?

What if... drugs, machines or genetic engineering could increase your memory and intelligence?

We now have drugs to slow memory problems associated with Alzheimer's disease. Many drug companies, including Memory Pharmaceuticals, a company set up by Nobel Prize winner Dr. Eric Kandel, are developing new chemicals to improve memory.

• Should drugs be developed to increase the intellectual abilities of people without any illness or disorder?
• Would it be a good idea to take a pill to improve your memory and attention or would there be significant side effects?
• If such a "smart pill" existed, who should get it?
• Do we already have drugs, such as caffeine and nicotine, to improve performance? If so, are these any different than a new smart pill?
• Would smart pills make people happier or more depressed?
• In 1999, researchers genetically engineered a mouse that outperforms regular mice on learning and memory tasks. Should this technology be used in humans to produce people with superior mental abilities? 

Technological advances already assist people with hearing and visual problems. For example, cochlear implants are used to improve hearing and the development of an artificial retina is progressing.

• Could and should we develop a machine-brain implant to boost intelligence?
• If these methods existed, who would get them? Some people believe that these methods would be used only by those rich enough to buy them.
• If everyone took a smart pill, would "normal" intelligence have to be redefined? Would this change put pressure on people to take the pill?
• Is taking a pill to increase intelligence a form of cheating? Is taking a pill no different than enrolling in a study class or getting special tutoring?
• Does it matter how intelligence is improved?

What if... memories could be erased?

Drugs to improve memory might sound like a good idea, but drugs to erase memories might also be useful. In fact, some drug companies are trying to develop chemicals to block the formation of memories. These drugs might be used to remove the memory of a traumatic event and help a victim recover. On the other hand, traumatic events can serve as a learning tool that emphasizes the danger of the event -- erasing memories may prevent a person from avoiding a traumatic situation in the future.

What if... the brain could be controlled from a distance?

Areas of the brain can be stimulated or suppressed by placing a transcranial magnetic stimulator (TMS) over the scalp. The TMS directs magnetic fields toward the brain and has been used to study movement, sensation and memory. Magnetic stimulation has also been used to treat depression and epilepsy.

• What if magnetic fields could be directed at someone from a distance?
• How would magnetic fields affect behavior and thought?
• Could this technology be used without a person's knowledge?
• Would this be an invasion of privacy?
• Could this technology be used as a weapon?

The Future

Although new discoveries will likely lead to machines and drugs that can enhance the brain, the question becomes what should be done with these new drugs and new technology. Will people lose their sense of self if they take one of these new drugs? Will they become less human if they are implanted with a computer chip to aid their memory? What are the long-term effects of enhancing intelligence?

The Golden Rule

The Golden Rule or Ethic of reciprocity is a maxim,ethical code or morality that essentially states either of the following:

• Positive form of Golden Rule: One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.
• Negative form of Golden Rule: One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (also known as the Silver Rule).

This concept describes a "reciprocal", or "two-way", relationship between one's self and others that involves both sides equally, and in a mutual fashion.

The Golden Rule or the ethic of reciprocity is found in the scriptures of nearly every religion. It is often regarded as the most concise and general principle of ethics. It is a condensation in one principle of all longer lists of ordinances

This concept can be explained from the perspective of psychology, philosophy, sociology and religion. Psychologically, it involves a person empathizing with others. Philosophically, it involves a person perceiving their neighbor as also "an I" or "self." Sociologically, this principle is applicable between individuals, between groups, and also between individuals and groups. (For example, a person living by this rule treats all people with consideration, not just members of his or her in-group). Religion is an integral part of the history of this concept.

As a concept of "the ethic of reciprocity," it has its roots in a wide range of world cultures, and is a standard way that different cultures use to resolve conflicts. It has a long history, and a great number of prominent religious figures and philosophers have restated its reciprocal, "two-way" nature in various ways.

Criticism : 

Immanuel Kant famously criticized the golden rule for not being sensitive to differences of situation, noting that a prisoner duly convicted of a crime could appeal to the golden rule while asking the judge to release him, pointing out that the judge would not want anyone else to send him to prison, so he should not do so to others.

Bernard Shaw comments about differing tastes which suggests that if your values are not shared with others, the way you want to be treated will not be the way they want to be treated.

Responses to Criticism

Marcus George Singer observed that there are two importantly different ways of looking at the golden rule: as requiring (1) that you perform specific actions that you want others to do to you or (2) that you guide your behavior in the same general ways that you want others to.Counter-examples to the golden rule typically are more forceful against the first than the second.

In his book on the golden rule, Jeffrey Wattles makes the similar observation that such objections typically arise while applying the golden rule in certain general ways (namely, ignoring differences in taste, in situation, and so forth). But if we apply the golden rule to our own method of using it, asking in effect if we would want other people to apply the golden rule in such ways, the answer would typically be no, since it is quite predictable that others' ignoring of such factors will lead to behavior which we object to. It follows that we should not do so ourselves—according to the golden rule. In this way, the golden rule may be self-correcting.We would often want other people to ignore any prejudice against our race or nationality when deciding how to act towards us, but would also want them to not ignore our differing preferences in food, desire for aggressiveness, and so on.