首页> 外文期刊>AJOB empirical bioethics. >Do We Need Neuroethics?
【24h】

Do We Need Neuroethics?

机译:我们需要神经素质吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Do we need neuroethics? This provocative question, posed almost 20 years after a series of landmark neuroethics conferences in North America (Marcus 2002; Canadian Institutes of Health Research 2002), can't be answered briefly. We dan, however, consider some of the most important arguments in favor of neuroethics. First, neuroethics may appear to be needed because neurosci-ence offers a new lens on human morality. This is an argument made by neuroscientists Michael Gazzaniga (Gazzaniga 2005) and (to some extent) Jean-Pierre Changeux (Changeux & Ricoeur 2000; Changeux 1981)— though the latter does not use the term "neuroethics" explicitly. But is neuroscience really a unique or superior source of information about morality? Second, it may seem that neuroethics is needed to address the daunting ethical problems that are raised specifically by advances in neuroscience, including new technologies. But here again, there are reasons for nurturing healthy skepticism. In contrast to these two foundational arguments, we argue for a more "instrumental" justification of neuroethics. Neuroethics will not yield an entirely new vision of human morality, but it certainly offers precious insights that a scientifically oriented ethics should consider. Furthermore, though the issues raised by neuroscience research may not be unique nor the most important in the grand scheme of things, they are important enough to warrant the attention of a dedicated community of scholars and practitioners who have at heart the well-being of individuals who live with neurological and psychiatric illnesses or who are personally impacted by applications of neuroscience. This togetherness and sense of community, oriented toward the betterment of the lives of specific groups of individuals, is, in our eyes, the key reason why we need a neuroethics (Racine & Sample 2018; Racine 2010). This orientation serves, beyond publications, funding, or number of scholars involved, as a benchmark for the evaluation of the field of neuroethics, what it is becoming, and how well it is doing.
机译:我们需要神经素质吗?这一挑衅性的问题,在北美的一系列里程碑意义的神经素质会议(Marcus 2002; 2002年)的一系列里程碑意义的神经素质会议后,提出了近20年,不能简要回答。然而,我们丹考虑了一些最重要的论据,有利于神经素质。首先,似乎是神经素质可能需要的,因为神经科学为人类道德提供了新的镜头。这是神经科学家Michael Gazzaniga(Gazzaniga 2005)和(在某种程度上)Jean-Pierre Changeux(Changeux&Ricoeur 2000; Changeux 1981) - 虽然后者没有明确地使用术语“神经言语”。但是神经科学是否真的是有关道德信息的独特或优越的信息?其次,似乎需要神经素质来解决令人生畏的道德问题,这些问题是通过神经科学的进步而闻名的令人生畏的伦理问题,包括新技术。但在这里,有些原因有培养健康的怀疑。与这两个基本论点相比,我们争论了神经素质的更多“工具”理由。神经素质不会产生一个完全的人类道德愿景,但它肯定提供了珍贵的见解,以至于科学为导向的道德应该考虑。此外,虽然神经科学研究的问题可能并不是独特的,但在盛大的事物方案中也不是最重要的,但它们非常重要,以便保证注意一家专业的学者和从业人员的人,他们的心脏是个人的福祉谁与神经系统和精神病疾病一起生活,或者是由神经科学的应用受到个人影响的人。这一团结和社区感,朝着改善特定人群的生活,是我们的眼睛,是我们的眼睛,我们需要一个神经素质的主要原因(RACINE和SEMPLE 2018; RACINE 2010)。这种定向除了出版,资金或学者数量,作为评估神经素质领域的基准,它变得变得越来越多,以及它的表现。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号