Biological Approach - Contemporary Debate: The ethics of neuroscience Flashcards
1
Q
What are all of the reasons why Neuroscience is ethical
A
- understanding consciousness
- treat/prevent criminal behaviour
- enhancing neurological function
- improving marketing techniques ‘neuromarketing’
- Brain organoids
2
Q
What are the reasons why neuroscience isn’t ethical
A
- what are the implications if we are able to locate consciousness?
- is it ethical to punish/convict criminals preemptively?
- Kadosh et al. (Enhancing neurological function)
- neuromarketing limits our free will
- brain organoids being taken too far
- implications to the deaf community
3
Q
What’s being assessed in these Qs
A
- AO1 (knowledge)
- AO3 (discussion)
—> means you need to have 4 paragraphs + conclusion
—> should go: agree, disagree, agree, disagree then conclusion
4
Q
How do you write a good conclusion
A
- opening statement (in conclusion, it is/isn’t…)
- Explain your main position
- Wider consideration (think about developments in the future)
5
Q
Explain how ‘understanding consciousness ’ proves that neuroscience is ethical
A
- Crick & Koch (1998) say that the claustrum (sheet if neurones found in the brain) is the seat of the consciousness. It orchestrates information from distinct brain regions
- Koubeissi et al, (2014) case study of 54 yr old woman who suffered severe epilepsy. Electrode was placed near the claustrum and electrically stimulated. The woman stopped reading, stared blankly and didn’t respond to visual or auditory commands. When stimulation stopped, she regained consciousness immediately with no recollection of the event
- this helps us make decisions about people in a persistent vegetative state to see if an electrode could wake them and see if they’re conscious or not —> then make decisions to withdraw life support or not
6
Q
Explain the counter to ‘understanding consciousness’
A
- withdrawing life-support from individuals just because they have currently lost consciousness is unethical
- also — isn’t there a moral right to withdraw care? You can’t make that decision for them
- there’s also a debate about soundness of evidence drawn from Koubeissi et al because they only researched 1 ‘abnormal brain’. —> low generalisability
7
Q
Explain how ‘treat/prevent and understand criminal behaviour’ proves that neuroscience is ethical
A
- explored by Quirk whereby he wanted to investigate the effects of neurofeedback treatment on 77 dangerous offenders who suffered from deep brain epileptic activity
- it was found that there was a significant decrease in criminal recidivism and impulsivity
- similarly, Cherek et al researched into the levels of impulsivity and aggression of male criminals who received an SSRI, and they showed that there was a decrease in aggression.
- This also showed how pharmacological treatment could be used in treating criminals alongside neurofeedback treatments.
- This is ethical as it gives a chance for the individual criminal himself to be treated rather than punished
8
Q
Explain the counter to ‘treat/prevent and understand criminal behaviour’
A
- Farah (2004) argues that the use of neuroscience in the judicial system symbolises the denial of individual freedom.
- Additionally it can be argued that the crime is due to the social context rather than a biological factor.
- This makes the treatment unethical as it is not ethically right to base decisions about criminals on the findings based on biological factors if social factors (e.g. childhood trauma) are to blame for criminality instead
9
Q
Explain how ‘enhancing neurological function’ proves that neuroscience is ethical
A
- neurofeedback has been an advantage in terms of enhancing neurological functionality
- Kadosh et al argued that the use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) involves sending small electrical currents to specific targeted areas of the brain
- when this was used on students it was found that their problem-solving skills and mathematical abilities had improved
- this depicts how ethical neuroscience is as it could benefit students, for example, in preparation for tests
10
Q
Explain the counter for ‘enhancing neurological functionality’
A
- Kadosh also outlined how TDCS doesn’t require specific rules which clinicians need to follow when treating people
- this could result in poorly qualified clinicians administering TDCS which increase chances of ineffective treatment as well as chances of causing permanent brain damage
- this unethical side of neuroscience signifies its many disadvantage that could easily disrupt one’s life if not carefully used
11
Q
Explain how ‘neuromarketing techniques’ proves that neuroscience is ethical
A
- through the use of EEG and Functional Magentic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) it’s possible to measure brain activity thus see how effective an advert could be. It avoids social desirability —> brain activity shows when there’s genuine interest
- Sands Research (company) used this when they were created a successful ad ‘The force’ (Volkswagen). Doug Van Praet noted that it contributed to higher sales that year
- This shows how neuroscience is beneficial to the economy in the long term
12
Q
Explain the counter to ‘neuromarketing techniques’
A
- Hammond et al argues that neuroscience requires practise and training under professional supervision or by a professional. This will be costly and not always available
- Furthermore, Wilson et al argued that neuromarketing shows the manipulation of individual’s free will, as big brands purposefully send individualised adverts so that an individual will have difficulties making choices
- Nelson’s ‘incidental findings’ = those conducting scans weren’t professionals = may see abnormalities in brain that they don’t recognise (like a tumour) but aren’t obliged to let patients know = highly unethical
- All these are unethical as neuroscience involves deception but also the fact that they might have something wrong and not be told just because of marketing purposes are signs of exploitation
13
Q
Explain how ‘brain organoids’ proves that neuroscience is ethical
A
- they’re created from stem cells which differentiate into brain cells then organise themselves into structures which resemble the human brain
- before brain organoids, the human brain could only be studied post-mortem. Which has limitations
- brain organoids allow scientists to develop treatments and cures for mental diseases such as Alzheimer’s, as it allows scientists to research on live brain tissue
- This is undoubtably ethical due to the benefits it offers society in treating mental diseases
- Moreover, currently brain organoids can only respond molecularly and physiologically, but not psychologically that would suggest it has a conscience or high level thinking —> resolves ethical issue of if it has a conscience
14
Q
Explain the counter to ‘brain organoids’
A
- currently there’s very little regulation
- the issue with this is that it has led to human neurones being implanted in a mouse brain
- the mice implanted with a human gial cell = smarter + better memory
- if this was taken any further = we’d have to start taking more serious obligations
- we’d have to question the agricultural industry
15
Q
Explain how ‘restoring hearing’ prove that neuroscience is ethical
A
- One of the most successful methods involves cochlear implants.
- These electronic devices are surgically implanted into the inner ear and stimulate the auditory nerve directly, bypassing damaged hair cells.
- This allows individuals with severe hearing loss or deafness to perceive sound.
- this is ethical as restoring hearing can significantly improve the quality of life for deaf individuals, allowing them to communicate more effectively, engage in social activities, and access various opportunities.
