Biological Debate Flashcards
For treating criminal behaviour
S- it can be used to rehabilitate offenders. If criminal offences are a result of biological abnormalities then biological therapies can treat it
E- for example, cherek et al found that males with a history of criminal behaviour showed a decrease in aggression and impulsiveness after using antidepressants compared to those who took a placebo.
E- such uses of neuroscience makes the use of it more ethical as it offers a form of rehabilitation
I- a social implication is that is offers a chance for prisoners to be rehabilitated and doubles as an economic implication because if we are able to prevent crime then less money goes into the prison system
W- therefore supports the argument that neuroscience is ethical as it can decrease unwanted behaviour in criminals.
Against treating criminal behaviour
S- there is evidence to suggest that the use of neuroscience for rehabilitation is unethical and is an invasive form of medication
E- for example Farah suggested if the criminal justice system were to use neuroscience to alter the behaviour of prisoners, it takes away their individual freedom.
E- this is unethical as prisoners can be deemed vulnerable further its deemed unethical to alter an individual’s brain function as it exerts the power against prisoners
I- a economic implication is that less money is spent of prisoners who are wrongly accused and are convicted
W- therefore neuroscience isn’t ethical as it is seen as invasive and unethical to alter an individual’s way of thinking, resulting in less free will.
Overall conclusion for treating criminal behaviour
- unethical because it takes away individual freedo, of a criminal despite their crimes
- medically too invasive
- violates their feeling of vulnerability
For Developing cures for diseases
S- ethical because of its performance in the role of developing cures for diseases
E- for exampl, mayberg et al found neuroscience has helped to develop effective treatments for disorders such as depression and OCD like Prozac which lowers the levels of seratonin
E- this suggest its effective for many purposes suggesting it’s a versatile method of treatment
I- economic implication of this is that its cost effective to treat lots of people at the same time
W- it’s therefore ethical as it has provided the field of medicine with groundbreaking treatments for many different diseases making it ethical
Against developing cures for diseases
S- it isn’t ethical as it therapies such as psychosurgery can cause psychological/physical harm due to its side effects like memory loss etc
E- for example, Ferguson et al looked at the range of studies involving antidepressants and concluded that people taking the drug were twice as likely to attempt suicide compared to those given the placebo.
E- these findings show that side effects of treatments may sometimes be worse than the original disorder making it unethical
W- overall neuroscience is unethical as it is proven to have extremely invasive therapies like psychosurgery which does more harm than good and isn’t worth the risk
For enhancing neurological function
S- ethical as it enhances neurological functions and improves a persons abilities. TDCS involves passing a small electrical current across a specific area of the brain to enhance performance.
E- for example, Kadosh et al found that TDCS led to an improvement in problem solving, maths and language making it beneficial to society
E- arguably is ethical as is gives the individual a chance to thrive in education
I- a social implication of this is that if student were to used neurological enhancement, they would be more alert and focused
W- therefore ethical as it have positive implications and leads to a better quality of life
Against neurological enhancement
S- unethical to use neurological enhancements
E- kadosh et al found research that warns that there’s no licensing rules for the use of TDCS for practitioners
E- this means that under qualified individuals can administer the treatment which could have serious ethical issues consequences such as high risk of physical harm (brain damage)
I- one implication of this is that socially neurological enhancement is only available to those who can afford it therefore put those who can’t afford it at a disadvantage.
W- therefore unethical as it is limited to those who can afford it creating societal divisions as well as increasing physical harm to the brain
