All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form ... more All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
The geo-political restructuring that Benedikter and Kofler describe as reglobalization also estab... more The geo-political restructuring that Benedikter and Kofler describe as reglobalization also establishes newly developing fora and vectors for scientific and technological (S/T) enterprise. Such ventures are clearly influencing major biomedical markets but also, and perhaps ever more explicitly, are transforming the capabilities and perhaps the very concept of the human being. 1 Re-globalization entails, or at least implies, inter-disciplinary and multinational perspectives on the current global system of norms, standards, and mores. How, and to what extent, will these new constructs influence S/T endeavors to evoke changes in the ways that humanity views, accesses, and affects biological systems to direct change in human understanding, capability, relationships, and power? One of the focal domains of
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or ... more No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a license permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters' suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.
Neuroethics is uniquely situated to socially interpret what brain sciences are learning about soc... more Neuroethics is uniquely situated to socially interpret what brain sciences are learning about social and moral cognition while helping society hold neurosci-entific research and neurotechnological applications to firm moral standards. Both tasks, if they are to be pursued successfully, must find ways to closely relate the "neuro" with the "ethical." Keeping them apart has been the objective of nonnaturalist worldviews worried about scientism and reductionism, and now they complain about "neuroessentialism" and similar labels for dissolutions of agency and responsibility into mere brain activity. A nonnaturalistic neuroeth-ics, on whatever metaphysical basis, insists that the biology of brains could not explain moral decisions or ground moral norms. We agree on that much, since the methodology of brain sciences presumes, and cannot replace, behavioral and psychological attributions of moral capacity and conduct. But the social and the neurological are always related through the anthropological; and that common basis is, not coincidentally, also where the ethical is grounded, as humanity upholds persons as bearers of moral worth and moral capacity. Neuroethics, by focusing on persons, need never resort to nonnaturalism to uphold what ultimately matters for ethics, and "naturalizing" neuroethics is also unnecessary for a humanity-centered neurobioethics.
Enhancements for morality could become technologically practical at the expense of becoming uneth... more Enhancements for morality could become technologically practical at the expense of becoming unethical and uncivil. A mode of moral enhancement intensifying a person's imposition of conformity upon others, labeled here as "moral righteousness", is particularly problematic. Moral energies contrary to expansions of civil rights and liberties can drown out reasoned justifications for equality and freedom, delaying social progress. The technological capacity of moral righteousness in the hands of a majority could impose puritanical conformities and override some rights and liberties. Fortunately, there cannot be a human right or a civil right to access righteous moral enhancement, and governments would be prudent to forbid such technology for moral righteousness. From an enlarged perspective, less righteousness could lead to a more just society. Going further, if a neurological intervention for moral righteousness could be invented, so too could moral de-enhancement, here labeled as "moral toleration". Perhaps moral toleration deserves as much commendation as so-called moral enhancement. Justice with less delay can be justice enhanced.
How should ethics help decide the morality of enhancing morality? The idea of morally enhancing t... more How should ethics help decide the morality of enhancing morality? The idea of morally enhancing the human brain quickly emerged when the promise of cog-nitive enhancement in general began to seem realizable. However, on reflection, achieving moral enhancement must be limited by the practical challenges to any sort of cognitive modification, along with obstacles particular to morality's bases in social cognition. The objectivity offered by the brain sciences cannot ensure the technological achievement of moral bioenhancement for humanity-wide application. Additionally, any limited moral enhancement will not easily fulfil ethical expectations. Three hypothetical scenarios involving putative moral enhancement help illustrate why. Philosophical concerns about the BDoes-Must Dichotomy^ and the BFactor-Cause Plurality,^ as I label them, forbid easy leaps from views about morality on to conclusions about ways to enhance morality, and then further on to ethically justifying those enhancements. A modest and realistic approach to moral enhancement emerges from exploring these issues.
We elaborate a pragmatic and contextualized outlook for comprehending the tasks and methods of th... more We elaborate a pragmatic and contextualized outlook for comprehending the tasks and methods of the new interdisciplinary field of neuroethics. Within that outlook, we specifically highlight crucial features to the current understanding of brain processes responsible for moral cognition and moral judgment. Neuroethics will also foster speculations about the wider implications of revolutionary paradigms and novel technosciences able to affect and modify moral cognition. We recommend that neuroethics should stay pragmatically
As Charles Peirce developed his pragmatic methodology and metaphysical cosmology, he also explore... more As Charles Peirce developed his pragmatic methodology and metaphysical cosmology, he also explored philosophical views about religion and God. Religion and science could be reconciled, he judged, if inquiries into God applied his scientific philosophy. Peirce died before clarifying what a Peircean God is like, but cooperation between theology, philosophy, and cosmology should pursue this effort. Core components of Peirce's system are used to formulate theistic, pantheistic, and panentheistic candidates for a Peircean God. These candidates are evaluated by the demands of his philosophical system, and then compared against contemporary science's understanding of the universe. Panentheism best fulfills Peircean expectations that God has complete creative and design control over the universe's entire development.
The roles of abductive inference in dynamic heuristics allows scientific methodologies to test no... more The roles of abductive inference in dynamic heuristics allows scientific methodologies to test novel explanations for the world's ways. Deliberate reasoning often follows abductive patterns, as well as patterns dominated by deduction and induction, but complex mixtures of these three modes of inference are crucial for scientific explanation. All possible mixed inferences are formulated and categorized using a novel typology and nomenclature. Twenty five possible combinations among abduction, induction, and deduction are assembled and analyzed in order of complexity. There are five primary categories for sorting these inferential procedures: fallacies, non-scientific procedures, quasi-scientific procedures, scientific procedures, and scientific heuristics.
An integrated and principled neuroethics offers ethical guidelines able to transcend conventional... more An integrated and principled neuroethics offers ethical guidelines able to transcend conventional and medical reliance on normality standards. Elsewhere we have proposed four principles for wise guidance on human transformations. Principles like these are already urgently needed, as bio-and cyberenhancements are rapidly emerging. Context matters. Neither " treatments " nor " enhancements " are objectively identifi able apart from performance expectations, social contexts, and civic orders. Lessons learned from disability studies about enablement and inclusion suggest a fresh way to categorize modifi cations to the body and its performance. The term " enhancement " should be broken apart to permit recognition of enablements and augmentations, and kinds of radical augmentation for specialized performance. Augmentations affecting the self, self-worth, and self-identity of persons require heightened ethical scrutiny. Reversibility becomes the core problem, not the easy answer, as augmented persons may not cooperate with either decommissioning or displacement into unaccommodating societies. We conclude by indicating how our four principles of self-creativity, nonobsolescence, empowerment, and citizenship establish a neuroethics beyond normal that is better prepared for a future in which humans and their societies are going so far beyond normal.
Neuroethics applies cognitive neuroscience for prescribing alterations to conceptions of self and... more Neuroethics applies cognitive neuroscience for prescribing alterations to conceptions of self and society, and for prescriptively judging the ethical applications of neurotechnologies. Plentiful normative premises are available to ground such prescriptivity, however prescriptive neuroethics may remain fragmented by social conventions, cultural ideologies, and ethical theories. Herein we offer that an objectively principled neuroethics for international relevance requires a new meta-ethics: understanding how morality works, and how humans manage and improve morality, as objectively based on the brain and social sciences. This new meta-ethics will simultaneously equip neuroethics for evaluating and revising older cultural ideologies and ethical theories, and direct neuroethics towards scientifically valid views of encultured humans intelligently managing moralities. Bypassing absolutism, cultural essentialisms, and unrealistic ethical philosophies, neuroethics arrives at a small set of principles about proper human flourishing that are more culturally inclusive and cosmopolitan in spirit. This cosmopolitanism in turn suggests augmentations to traditional medical ethics in the form of four principled guidelines for international consideration: empowerment, non-obsolescence, self-creativity, and citizenship.
Neurothics has far greater responsibilities than merely noting potential human enhancements arriv... more Neurothics has far greater responsibilities than merely noting potential human enhancements arriving from novel brain-centered biotechnologies and tracking their implications for ethics and civic life. Neuroethics must utilize the best cognitive and neuroscientific knowledge to shape incisive discussions about what could possibly count as enhancement in the first place, and what should count as genuinely "cognitive" enhancement. Where cognitive processing and the mental life is concerned, the lived context of psychological performance is paramount. Starting with an enhancement to the mental abilities of an individual, only performances on real-world exercises can determine what has actually been cognitively improved. And what can concretely counts as some specific sort of cognitive improvement is largely determined by the classificatory frameworks of cultures, not brain scans or laboratory experiments. Additionally, where the public must ultimately evaluate and judge the worthiness of individual performance enhancements, we mustn't presume that public approval towards enhancers will somehow automatically arrive without due regard to civic ideals such as the common good or social justice. In the absence of any nuanced appreciation for the control which performance contexts and public contexts exert over what "cognitive" enhancements could actually be, enthusiastic promoters of cognitive enhancement can all too easily depict safe and effective brain modifications as surely good for us and for society. These enthusiasts are not unaware of oft-heard observations about serious hurdles for reliable enhancement from neurophysiological modifications. Yet those observations are far more common than penetrating investigations into the implications to those hurdles for a sound public understanding of cognitive enhancement, and a wise policy review over cognitive enhancement. We offer some crucial recommendations for undertaking such investigations, so that cognitive enhancers that truly deserve public approval can be better identified.
| Atheology is the term for exploring unbelief and explaining its reasonableness. Scientific athe... more | Atheology is the term for exploring unbelief and explaining its reasonableness. Scientific atheology specifically appeals to current sciences and scientific methodologies to help explain why no gods are real. Folk religions and anthropomorphic gods can't survive, but science vs. religion is hardly the whole story. Only science joined by philosophical reflection suffices to skeptically analyze the natural theology arguments for supernatural gods, too aloof and abstract for direct confrontation over evidence. Theology's desperate maneuvers for avoiding science and scientific atheology only delay the inevitable. Partner atheologies wielding logic, ethics, and civics await to help theology extinguish the gods.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form ... more All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
The geo-political restructuring that Benedikter and Kofler describe as reglobalization also estab... more The geo-political restructuring that Benedikter and Kofler describe as reglobalization also establishes newly developing fora and vectors for scientific and technological (S/T) enterprise. Such ventures are clearly influencing major biomedical markets but also, and perhaps ever more explicitly, are transforming the capabilities and perhaps the very concept of the human being. 1 Re-globalization entails, or at least implies, inter-disciplinary and multinational perspectives on the current global system of norms, standards, and mores. How, and to what extent, will these new constructs influence S/T endeavors to evoke changes in the ways that humanity views, accesses, and affects biological systems to direct change in human understanding, capability, relationships, and power? One of the focal domains of
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or ... more No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a license permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters' suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.
Neuroethics is uniquely situated to socially interpret what brain sciences are learning about soc... more Neuroethics is uniquely situated to socially interpret what brain sciences are learning about social and moral cognition while helping society hold neurosci-entific research and neurotechnological applications to firm moral standards. Both tasks, if they are to be pursued successfully, must find ways to closely relate the "neuro" with the "ethical." Keeping them apart has been the objective of nonnaturalist worldviews worried about scientism and reductionism, and now they complain about "neuroessentialism" and similar labels for dissolutions of agency and responsibility into mere brain activity. A nonnaturalistic neuroeth-ics, on whatever metaphysical basis, insists that the biology of brains could not explain moral decisions or ground moral norms. We agree on that much, since the methodology of brain sciences presumes, and cannot replace, behavioral and psychological attributions of moral capacity and conduct. But the social and the neurological are always related through the anthropological; and that common basis is, not coincidentally, also where the ethical is grounded, as humanity upholds persons as bearers of moral worth and moral capacity. Neuroethics, by focusing on persons, need never resort to nonnaturalism to uphold what ultimately matters for ethics, and "naturalizing" neuroethics is also unnecessary for a humanity-centered neurobioethics.
Enhancements for morality could become technologically practical at the expense of becoming uneth... more Enhancements for morality could become technologically practical at the expense of becoming unethical and uncivil. A mode of moral enhancement intensifying a person's imposition of conformity upon others, labeled here as "moral righteousness", is particularly problematic. Moral energies contrary to expansions of civil rights and liberties can drown out reasoned justifications for equality and freedom, delaying social progress. The technological capacity of moral righteousness in the hands of a majority could impose puritanical conformities and override some rights and liberties. Fortunately, there cannot be a human right or a civil right to access righteous moral enhancement, and governments would be prudent to forbid such technology for moral righteousness. From an enlarged perspective, less righteousness could lead to a more just society. Going further, if a neurological intervention for moral righteousness could be invented, so too could moral de-enhancement, here labeled as "moral toleration". Perhaps moral toleration deserves as much commendation as so-called moral enhancement. Justice with less delay can be justice enhanced.
How should ethics help decide the morality of enhancing morality? The idea of morally enhancing t... more How should ethics help decide the morality of enhancing morality? The idea of morally enhancing the human brain quickly emerged when the promise of cog-nitive enhancement in general began to seem realizable. However, on reflection, achieving moral enhancement must be limited by the practical challenges to any sort of cognitive modification, along with obstacles particular to morality's bases in social cognition. The objectivity offered by the brain sciences cannot ensure the technological achievement of moral bioenhancement for humanity-wide application. Additionally, any limited moral enhancement will not easily fulfil ethical expectations. Three hypothetical scenarios involving putative moral enhancement help illustrate why. Philosophical concerns about the BDoes-Must Dichotomy^ and the BFactor-Cause Plurality,^ as I label them, forbid easy leaps from views about morality on to conclusions about ways to enhance morality, and then further on to ethically justifying those enhancements. A modest and realistic approach to moral enhancement emerges from exploring these issues.
We elaborate a pragmatic and contextualized outlook for comprehending the tasks and methods of th... more We elaborate a pragmatic and contextualized outlook for comprehending the tasks and methods of the new interdisciplinary field of neuroethics. Within that outlook, we specifically highlight crucial features to the current understanding of brain processes responsible for moral cognition and moral judgment. Neuroethics will also foster speculations about the wider implications of revolutionary paradigms and novel technosciences able to affect and modify moral cognition. We recommend that neuroethics should stay pragmatically
As Charles Peirce developed his pragmatic methodology and metaphysical cosmology, he also explore... more As Charles Peirce developed his pragmatic methodology and metaphysical cosmology, he also explored philosophical views about religion and God. Religion and science could be reconciled, he judged, if inquiries into God applied his scientific philosophy. Peirce died before clarifying what a Peircean God is like, but cooperation between theology, philosophy, and cosmology should pursue this effort. Core components of Peirce's system are used to formulate theistic, pantheistic, and panentheistic candidates for a Peircean God. These candidates are evaluated by the demands of his philosophical system, and then compared against contemporary science's understanding of the universe. Panentheism best fulfills Peircean expectations that God has complete creative and design control over the universe's entire development.
The roles of abductive inference in dynamic heuristics allows scientific methodologies to test no... more The roles of abductive inference in dynamic heuristics allows scientific methodologies to test novel explanations for the world's ways. Deliberate reasoning often follows abductive patterns, as well as patterns dominated by deduction and induction, but complex mixtures of these three modes of inference are crucial for scientific explanation. All possible mixed inferences are formulated and categorized using a novel typology and nomenclature. Twenty five possible combinations among abduction, induction, and deduction are assembled and analyzed in order of complexity. There are five primary categories for sorting these inferential procedures: fallacies, non-scientific procedures, quasi-scientific procedures, scientific procedures, and scientific heuristics.
An integrated and principled neuroethics offers ethical guidelines able to transcend conventional... more An integrated and principled neuroethics offers ethical guidelines able to transcend conventional and medical reliance on normality standards. Elsewhere we have proposed four principles for wise guidance on human transformations. Principles like these are already urgently needed, as bio-and cyberenhancements are rapidly emerging. Context matters. Neither " treatments " nor " enhancements " are objectively identifi able apart from performance expectations, social contexts, and civic orders. Lessons learned from disability studies about enablement and inclusion suggest a fresh way to categorize modifi cations to the body and its performance. The term " enhancement " should be broken apart to permit recognition of enablements and augmentations, and kinds of radical augmentation for specialized performance. Augmentations affecting the self, self-worth, and self-identity of persons require heightened ethical scrutiny. Reversibility becomes the core problem, not the easy answer, as augmented persons may not cooperate with either decommissioning or displacement into unaccommodating societies. We conclude by indicating how our four principles of self-creativity, nonobsolescence, empowerment, and citizenship establish a neuroethics beyond normal that is better prepared for a future in which humans and their societies are going so far beyond normal.
Neuroethics applies cognitive neuroscience for prescribing alterations to conceptions of self and... more Neuroethics applies cognitive neuroscience for prescribing alterations to conceptions of self and society, and for prescriptively judging the ethical applications of neurotechnologies. Plentiful normative premises are available to ground such prescriptivity, however prescriptive neuroethics may remain fragmented by social conventions, cultural ideologies, and ethical theories. Herein we offer that an objectively principled neuroethics for international relevance requires a new meta-ethics: understanding how morality works, and how humans manage and improve morality, as objectively based on the brain and social sciences. This new meta-ethics will simultaneously equip neuroethics for evaluating and revising older cultural ideologies and ethical theories, and direct neuroethics towards scientifically valid views of encultured humans intelligently managing moralities. Bypassing absolutism, cultural essentialisms, and unrealistic ethical philosophies, neuroethics arrives at a small set of principles about proper human flourishing that are more culturally inclusive and cosmopolitan in spirit. This cosmopolitanism in turn suggests augmentations to traditional medical ethics in the form of four principled guidelines for international consideration: empowerment, non-obsolescence, self-creativity, and citizenship.
Neurothics has far greater responsibilities than merely noting potential human enhancements arriv... more Neurothics has far greater responsibilities than merely noting potential human enhancements arriving from novel brain-centered biotechnologies and tracking their implications for ethics and civic life. Neuroethics must utilize the best cognitive and neuroscientific knowledge to shape incisive discussions about what could possibly count as enhancement in the first place, and what should count as genuinely "cognitive" enhancement. Where cognitive processing and the mental life is concerned, the lived context of psychological performance is paramount. Starting with an enhancement to the mental abilities of an individual, only performances on real-world exercises can determine what has actually been cognitively improved. And what can concretely counts as some specific sort of cognitive improvement is largely determined by the classificatory frameworks of cultures, not brain scans or laboratory experiments. Additionally, where the public must ultimately evaluate and judge the worthiness of individual performance enhancements, we mustn't presume that public approval towards enhancers will somehow automatically arrive without due regard to civic ideals such as the common good or social justice. In the absence of any nuanced appreciation for the control which performance contexts and public contexts exert over what "cognitive" enhancements could actually be, enthusiastic promoters of cognitive enhancement can all too easily depict safe and effective brain modifications as surely good for us and for society. These enthusiasts are not unaware of oft-heard observations about serious hurdles for reliable enhancement from neurophysiological modifications. Yet those observations are far more common than penetrating investigations into the implications to those hurdles for a sound public understanding of cognitive enhancement, and a wise policy review over cognitive enhancement. We offer some crucial recommendations for undertaking such investigations, so that cognitive enhancers that truly deserve public approval can be better identified.
| Atheology is the term for exploring unbelief and explaining its reasonableness. Scientific athe... more | Atheology is the term for exploring unbelief and explaining its reasonableness. Scientific atheology specifically appeals to current sciences and scientific methodologies to help explain why no gods are real. Folk religions and anthropomorphic gods can't survive, but science vs. religion is hardly the whole story. Only science joined by philosophical reflection suffices to skeptically analyze the natural theology arguments for supernatural gods, too aloof and abstract for direct confrontation over evidence. Theology's desperate maneuvers for avoiding science and scientific atheology only delay the inevitable. Partner atheologies wielding logic, ethics, and civics await to help theology extinguish the gods.
The past decades of rapid progress in neuroscience have precipitated new technologies that can be... more The past decades of rapid progress in neuroscience have precipitated new technologies that can be used to enable and enhance humans. The current level of technology permits us to augment learning and cognitive performance, to manipulate emotions to a certain extent, and even to control robotics limbs with our minds. 1 The synergy of the technological imperative and the tools-to-theories heuristic predicts that these technologies will be used to enable and enhance, and that this will stimulate the development of even more powerful tools. 1, 2 This trajectory puts humanity on the path to cyborgization described by Clynes and Kline. 3 Future iterations of neurotechnology have potential to:
Uploads
Papers by John Shook