Neurotechnology ethics and relational agency

Understanding the Ethical Issues of Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs): A Blessing or the Beginning of a Dystopian Future?

In recent years, scientific discoveries in the field of neuroscience combined with developments in the field of artificial intelligence have led to the development of a range of neurotechnologies. Advances in neuroimaging systems, neurostimulators, and brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are leading to new ways of enhancing, controlling, and "reading" the brain. In addition, although BCIs were developed and used primarily in the medical field, they are now increasingly applied in other fields (entertainment, marketing, education, defense industry). We conducted a literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to provide background information about ethical issues related to the use of BCIs. Among the ethical issues that emerged from the thematic data analysis of the reviewed studies included questions revolving around human dignity, personhood and autonomy, user safety, stigma and discrimination, privacy and security, responsibility, research ethics, and social justice (including access to this technology). This paper attempts to address the various aspects of these concerns. A variety of distinct ethical issues were identified, which, for the most part, were in line with the findings of prior research. However, we identified two nuances, which are related to the empirical research on ethical issues related to BCIs and the impact of BCIs on international relationships. The paper also highlights the need for the cooperation of all stakeholders to ensure the ethical development and use of this technology and concludes with several recommendations. The principles of bioethics provide an initial guiding framework, which, however, should be revised in the current artificial intelligence landscape so as to be responsive to challenges posed by the development and use of BCIs.

Brain Pioneers and Moral Entanglement: An Argument for Post-trial Responsibilities in Neural-Device Trials

We argue that in implanted neurotechnology research, participants and researchers experience what Henry Richardson has called "moral entanglement." Participants partially entrust researchers with access to their brains and thus to information that would otherwise be private, leading to created intimacies and special obligations of beneficence for researchers and research funding agencies. One of these obligations, we argue, is about continued access to beneficial technology once a trial ends. We make the case for moral entanglement in this context through exploration of participants' vulnerability, uncompensated risks and burdens, depth of relationship with the research team, and dependence on researchers in implanted neurotechnology trials.

Recommendations for promoting user agency in the design of speech neuroprostheses

Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) that directly decode speech from brain activity aim to restore communication in people with paralysis who cannot speak. Despite recent advances, neural inference of speech remains imperfect, limiting the ability for speech BCIs to enable experiences such as fluent conversation that promote agency - that is, the ability for users to author and transmit messages enacting their intentions. Here, we make recommendations for promoting agency based on existing and emerging strategies in neural engineering. The focus is on achieving fast, accurate, and reliable performance while ensuring volitional control over when a decoder is engaged, what exactly is decoded, and how messages are expressed. Additionally, alongside neuroscientific progress within controlled experimental settings, we argue that a parallel line of research must consider how to translate experimental successes into real-world environments. While such research will ultimately require input from prospective users, here we identify and describe design choices inspired by human-factors work conducted in existing fields of assistive technology, which address practical issues likely to emerge in future real-world speech BCI applications.

Development of Korea Neuroethics Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Advances in neuroscience and neurotechnology provide great benefits to humans though unknown challenges may arise. We should address these challenges using new standards as well as existing ones. Novel standards should include ethical, legal, and social aspects which would be appropriate for advancing neuroscience and technology. Therefore, the Korea Neuroethics Guidelines were developed by stakeholders related to neuroscience and neurotechnology, including experts, policy makers, and the public in the Republic of Korea.

METHOD

The guidelines were drafted by neuroethics experts, were disclosed at a public hearing, and were subsequently revised by opinions of various stakeholders.

RESULTS

The guidelines are composed of twelve issues; humanity or human dignity, individual personality and identity, social justice, safety, sociocultural prejudice and public communication, misuse of technology, responsibility for the use of neuroscience and technology, specificity according to the purpose of using neurotechnology, autonomy, privacy and personal information, research, and enhancement.

CONCLUSION

Although the guidelines may require a more detailed discussion after future advances in neuroscience and technology or changes in socio-cultural milieu, the development of the Korea Neuroethics Guidelines is a milestone for the scientific community and society in general for the ongoing development in neuroscience and neurotechnology.

Weak transhumanism: moderate enhancement as a non-radical path to radical enhancement

Transhumanism aims to bring about radical human enhancement. In 'Truly Human Enhancement' Agar (2014) provides a strong argument against producing radically enhancing effects in agents. This leaves the transhumanist in a quandary-how to achieve radical enhancement whilst avoiding the problem of radically enhancing effects? This paper aims to show that transhumanism can overcome the worries of radically enhancing effects by instead pursuing radical human enhancement via incremental moderate human enhancements (Weak Transhumanism). In this sense, weak transhumanism is much like traditional transhumanism in its aims, but starkly different in its execution. This version of transhumanism is weaker given the limitations brought about by having to avoid radically enhancing effects. I consider numerous objections to weak transhumanism and conclude that the account survives each one. This paper's proposal of 'weak transhumanism' has the upshot of providing a way out of the 'problem of radically enhancing effects' for the transhumanist, but this comes at a cost-the restrictive process involved in applying multiple moderate enhancements in order to achieve radical enhancement will most likely be dissatisfying for the transhumanist, however, it is, I contend, the best option available.