Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:27:47.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neuroethical Theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2010

MATTI HÄYRY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Neuroethics addresses moral, legal, and social questions created or highlighted by theoretical and practical developments in neuroscience. Practices in need of scrutiny currently include at least brain imaging with new techniques, chemical attempts to shift exceptional brain function toward normality, chemical attempts to enhance ordinary brain function beyond normality, and brain manipulation by other methods.

Type
Special Section: Philosophical Issues in Neuroethics
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 165 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. A useful overview of the dimensions and questions of neuroethics is provided by the University of Pennsylvania web site Penn Neuroethics Briefing accessible at http://www.neuroethics.upenn.edu/ (last accessed 3 Aug 2009).

2. Comprehensive views on the philosophy and ethics of neuroscience have been presented in, e.g., Walter H. Neurophilosophy of Free Will: From Libertarian Illusions to a Concept of Natural Autonomy, C. Klohr, translator. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2001; Rees D, Rose S, eds., New Brain Science: Perils and Prospects. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2004; Gazzaniga MS. The Ethical Brain. Washington, DC: Dana Press; 2005; Glannon W. Bioethics and the Brain. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007.

3. Turing A. Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 1950;59:433–60.

4. See, e.g., Häyry M. The tension between self-governance and absolute inner worth in Kant's moral philosophy. Journal of Medical Ethics 2005;31:645–7.

5. Tom Buller addresses the question of scientific determinism versus free will in more detail in his contribution to this issue.

6. See, e.g., Timmons M. Morality Without Foundations: A Defense of Ethical Contextualism. New York: Oxford University Press; 1999; Jonsen A, Toulmin S. The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1988.

7. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009.

8. See, e.g., Häyry M. European values in bioethics: Why, what, and how to be used? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2003;24:199–214; Takala T, Herissone-Kelly P, Holm S, eds. Cutting through the Surface: Philosophical Approaches to Bioethics. Amsterdam: Rodopi; 2009, esp. chaps. 8–12.

9. See, e.g., Häyry M, Utilitarianism and bioethics. In: Ashcroft R, Dawson A, Draper H, McMillan J, eds. Principles of Health Care Ethics, 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2007:57–64.

10. Habermas J. The Future of Human Nature, Rehg W, Pensky M, Beister H, trans. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press; 2003.

11. Sandel MJ. The Case against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2007.