[Neuroethics: new quality of medical ethics?].

Lesław T Niebrój
{"title":"[Neuroethics: new quality of medical ethics?].","authors":"Lesław T Niebrój","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the last decade there has been a striking growth in interest in ethical issues arising from the development of neurosciences. It was as late as 2002 that the new discipline, called neuroethics, started. It was intended to be a new area of interdisciplinary discourse on moral dilemmas connected with recent advances in, broadly understood, neurosciences. Ten years after its launch neuroethics possesses a distinct body of knowledge and an institutional basis for its further development. As a very young discipline, however, neuroethics is still in a state offlux. Two essential theoretical concepts of how this discipline is to be built on are emerging. Both are discussed in this article. According to the first of them (i.e. ethics of neurosciences), neuroethics is basically understood as a sub--discipline of bioethics. Although there are some reasons for distinguishing several branches or sub-disciplines of bioethics (genethics, neuroethics, nanoethics, etc.), there are sound arguments against such a tendency for the proliferation of biomedical ethics. The second approach to neuroethics (neuroscience of ethics), which aims at studying neuronal correlates of the well-known ethical concepts (e.g. free-will, moral responsibility, etc.), seems to be much more promising. Neuroethics understood in this way (and only in this way) can be considered as a truly new opportunity for collaboration between neuroscientists and ethicists.</p>","PeriodicalId":7883,"journal":{"name":"Annales Academiae Medicae Stetinensis","volume":"59 1","pages":"130-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annales Academiae Medicae Stetinensis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the last decade there has been a striking growth in interest in ethical issues arising from the development of neurosciences. It was as late as 2002 that the new discipline, called neuroethics, started. It was intended to be a new area of interdisciplinary discourse on moral dilemmas connected with recent advances in, broadly understood, neurosciences. Ten years after its launch neuroethics possesses a distinct body of knowledge and an institutional basis for its further development. As a very young discipline, however, neuroethics is still in a state offlux. Two essential theoretical concepts of how this discipline is to be built on are emerging. Both are discussed in this article. According to the first of them (i.e. ethics of neurosciences), neuroethics is basically understood as a sub--discipline of bioethics. Although there are some reasons for distinguishing several branches or sub-disciplines of bioethics (genethics, neuroethics, nanoethics, etc.), there are sound arguments against such a tendency for the proliferation of biomedical ethics. The second approach to neuroethics (neuroscience of ethics), which aims at studying neuronal correlates of the well-known ethical concepts (e.g. free-will, moral responsibility, etc.), seems to be much more promising. Neuroethics understood in this way (and only in this way) can be considered as a truly new opportunity for collaboration between neuroscientists and ethicists.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
神经伦理学:医学伦理学的新品质?
在过去的十年中,由于神经科学的发展,人们对伦理问题的兴趣有了显著的增长。直到2002年,这门被称为神经伦理学的新学科才开始出现。它的目的是成为一个跨学科的道德困境讨论的新领域,与最近广泛理解的神经科学的进展有关。神经伦理学在成立十年后,拥有了独特的知识体系和进一步发展的制度基础。然而,作为一门非常年轻的学科,神经伦理学仍处于外流状态。关于如何建立这门学科的两个基本理论概念正在出现。本文将讨论这两个问题。根据前者(即神经科学伦理学),神经伦理学基本上被理解为生命伦理学的一个分支学科。尽管有一些理由区分生物伦理学的几个分支或子学科(基因伦理学、神经伦理学、纳米伦理学等),但反对这种生物医学伦理学扩散的趋势有充分的理由。神经伦理学的第二种方法(伦理学的神经科学),旨在研究众所周知的伦理概念(如自由意志、道德责任等)的神经元相关性,似乎更有希望。以这种方式(也只有以这种方式)理解的神经伦理学可以被认为是神经科学家和伦理学家之间合作的一个真正的新机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[ACNE VULGARIS--AETIOLOGY, CLASSIFICATION, TREATMENT]. INCREASING THE UPPER AIRWAY SPACE USING ORAL APPLIANCES IN PATIENTS WITH MILD SLEEP APNOEA CAUSED BY STOMATOGNATHIC DYSFUNCTIONS. [USE OF THE STRUCTURAL TENSEGRATION CONCEPT IN THE STECCO FASCIAL MANIPULATION METHOD]. THE INFLUENCE OF READING AND WRITING ON THE PREVALENCE OF MYOPIA. Antoni Christian Bryk (1820-1881) - professor of forensic medicine at Jagiellonian University (1852-1860), and director of the surgical clinic of Jagiellonian University in Cracow (1860-1881).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1