NeuroEthics

admin July 16, 2019

Abstract

Gilbert and colleagues (2018) point out the discrepancy between the limited empirical data illustrating changes in personality (and related concepts of identity, agency, authenticity, autonomy, and self, i.e., PIAAAS) following implantation of deep brain stimulating (DBS) electrodes and the vast number of conceptual neuroethics papers implying that these changes are widespread, deleterious, and clinically significant.… Read More...

admin July 12, 2019

Abstract

Gilbert et al. argue that the neuroethics literature discussing the putative effects of Deep Brain Stimulation on personality largely ignores the scientific evidence and presents distorted claims that personality change is induced by the DBS stimulation. This study contributes to the first-hand primary research on the topic exploring DBS clinicians’ views on post-DBS personality change among their patients and its underlying cause.… Read More...

admin July 8, 2019

Abstract

Brain-computer interfaces allow agents to control computers without moving their bodies. The agents imagine certain things and the brain-computer interfaces read the concomitant neural activity and operate the computer accordingly. But the use of brain-computer interfaces is problematic for criminal law, which requires that someone can only be found criminally responsible if they have satisfied the actus reus requirement: that the agent has performed some (suitably specified) conduct.… Read More...

admin July 4, 2019

Abstract

Research has documented the influence of ALS patients families’ attitudes on patients’ decision to accept or reject TIV (tracheostomy with invasive ventilation), a treatment that in many cases will allow them to live long enough to experience locked-in syndrome (LIS); under Japanese law the use of a ventilator cannot be terminated once it is essential to a patient’s survival, so to choose TIV means to choose the possibility of entering a locked-in state.… Read More...

Andoird App
Loading...