Neuroethics and International Biolaw

Archive for the ‘assignments’ Category

Camila. Week 1:questions.

Sunday, September 13th, 2009

1) Is it appropriate to start talking about a neurocentric age?

- Yes, for nowadays we are finally convinced to study the functioning of the brain as this would be a way to better understand the human condition.

2) How the emergence of new neuroscientific techniques has provoked bioethical issues?

- On the threshold of  the individual’s personal life. We have access to tones of information when using neuroscientific techniques, we are literally inside the individual’s brain and he certainly want his privacy on some issues. We also have access to modern medication and devices that increase some aspects of the cognition or even alter the individual’s personality and this kind of technology provoke several ethical issues.

3) Are we our brains? Are all bioethical issues nothing but neuroethical issues?

- I don’t think so.  I guess that our brains makes us more inclined to behave in a certain way but we are endowed with free-will, human consciousness, human agency enough to pick up a good fight with this supposed brain’s tyranny. When studying molecular neuropsychiatry for example, we try to verify if a determined combination of genes are more prone to cause a psychiatry disorder but the environment in which that individual is inserted has an extremely important role to trigger that disorder. Even drug abuse might be a triggering factor. So how would that be possible for us to be strictly biological machines?!

4) How do cognitive neuroscience and brain imaging contribute to neuroethics field?

- In the way that it both causes a lot more trouble for neuroethics to solve! Kidding. I mean, as long as cognitive neuroscience is concerned on how psychological/cognitive functions are produced by the brain and brain imaging helps elucidate it neuroethics will always have to regulate these activities concerning mind and behaviour.

First Week!!!

Monday, September 7th, 2009

During our first week, we are going to read introductory articles about neuroethics. All articles you are going to access are free. After reading the articles, you need to write posts on course’s blog, answering the questions proposed below. You are free to make comments about your colleagues’ posts and to raise your own questions as well. In fact, proposing new questions is strongly recommended and encouraged. Don’t be shy. We are trying to learn from each other, our course is advancing an entire new field (we are connecting two emerging fields indeed) and every insight is precious. I’ll try to answer those questions during  the week, organize the discussion and propose new topics. Remember: course’s blog is also your blog. Feel free to add new posts if you have something interesting to say about either neuroethics or international biolaw.
We are also going to use a chat room to discuss some ideas, present ourselves and contact each other.  Our first section will be probably on September 10. I’ll let you know about it.
Welcome to P2P University and have a nice day!

Cordially,
Ana Rosa Amorim
Course organizer.

Week 1: Neuroethics: An emerging field

Objective: Provide an overall perspective on Neuroethics.

Assignments: - Post entries to your blog, answering each one of the questions proposed below.

- Create an wiki page, jointly with your colleagues, presenting brain imaging methods and its relations to Neuroethics.

Questions:

1)    Is it appropriate to start talking about a neurocentric age?

2)    How the emergence of new neurocientific techniques has provoked bioethical issues?

3)    Are we our brains? Are all bioethical issues nothing but neuroethical issues?

4)    How do cognitive neuroscience and brain imaging contribute to neuroethics field?

New articles available

Wednesday, September 2nd, 2009

Two new articles available from Pubmed website:

1:
The international dimension of neuroethics
SOFIA LOMBERA and JUDY ILLES. Dev World Bioeth. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 August 3. PMCID: PMC2720416
Published in final edited form as: Dev World Bioeth. 2009 August; 9(2): 57–64. Published online 2008 April 25. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2008.00235.x.

2:
Disagreements with implications: diverging discourses on the ethics of non-medical use of methylphenidate for performance enhancement
Cynthia Forlini and Eric Racine, BMC Med Ethics. 2009; 10: 9. Published online 2009 July 6. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-10-9. PMCID: PMC2719652