Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethi...

Electronic data

View graph of relations

Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain

Research output: Book/Report/ProceedingsOther report

Published

Standard

Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies : intervening in the brain. / Gunnarsdottir, Kristrun; Chadwick, Ruth; Hughes, Jacqueline; Lewis, Jamie; O'Connor, Alan; Stephens, Neil.

Lancaster University, 2012. 23 p.

Research output: Book/Report/ProceedingsOther report

Harvard

Gunnarsdottir, K, Chadwick, R, Hughes, J, Lewis, J, O'Connor, A & Stephens, N 2012, Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain. vol. Prepared on behalf of Cesagen., Lancaster University.

APA

Gunnarsdottir, K., Chadwick, R., Hughes, J., Lewis, J., O'Connor, A., & Stephens, N. (2012). Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain. Lancaster University.

Vancouver

Gunnarsdottir K, Chadwick R, Hughes J, Lewis J, O'Connor A, Stephens N. Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain. Lancaster University, 2012. 23 p.

Author

Gunnarsdottir, Kristrun ; Chadwick, Ruth ; Hughes, Jacqueline ; Lewis, Jamie ; O'Connor, Alan ; Stephens, Neil. / Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies : intervening in the brain. Lancaster University, 2012. 23 p.

Bibtex

@book{7b145052f2de4726a0b7dd0ba3c10029,
title = "Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies: intervening in the brain",
abstract = "In what follows, we do not answer every question [by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics). We first proceed with our comments, referring to the numbered questions as appropriate. Thereafter, we give a case study from recent studies within Cesagen to illustrate more general insights for public policy. Case study 1 illustrates some of the complications that arise in public consultation about human enhancement, in particular, with reference to idealistic perceptions which are strongly influenced by long-term popular imaginations about the future of humans and their societies. As we said in a response to a previous consultation, our position is that attention needs to be paid to how the technologies and the associated issues are framed – ethically, politically, scientifically, and by whom. This includes how a given technology is itself described (typically well before it actually exists, if it comes to do so); the claims made for its purported benefits; how stakeholders are conceptualised; how social-cultural aspects will evolve. Such framing is not exclusively a scientific and technological matter but involves cultural and social imaginations as well as artistic ones.",
keywords = "Human enhancement, Advanced therapies, Implant, Identity, Selfhood, Informational bodies, Body modification, Vulnerability, Bioethics, Pragmatism, Technology convergence, Robotics, ELSi",
author = "Kristrun Gunnarsdottir and Ruth Chadwick and Jacqueline Hughes and Jamie Lewis and Alan O'Connor and Neil Stephens",
year = "2012",
month = apr
language = "English",
volume = "Prepared on behalf of Cesagen.",
publisher = "Lancaster University",

}

RIS

TY - BOOK

T1 - Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies

T2 - intervening in the brain

AU - Gunnarsdottir, Kristrun

AU - Chadwick, Ruth

AU - Hughes, Jacqueline

AU - Lewis, Jamie

AU - O'Connor, Alan

AU - Stephens, Neil

PY - 2012/4

Y1 - 2012/4

N2 - In what follows, we do not answer every question [by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics). We first proceed with our comments, referring to the numbered questions as appropriate. Thereafter, we give a case study from recent studies within Cesagen to illustrate more general insights for public policy. Case study 1 illustrates some of the complications that arise in public consultation about human enhancement, in particular, with reference to idealistic perceptions which are strongly influenced by long-term popular imaginations about the future of humans and their societies. As we said in a response to a previous consultation, our position is that attention needs to be paid to how the technologies and the associated issues are framed – ethically, politically, scientifically, and by whom. This includes how a given technology is itself described (typically well before it actually exists, if it comes to do so); the claims made for its purported benefits; how stakeholders are conceptualised; how social-cultural aspects will evolve. Such framing is not exclusively a scientific and technological matter but involves cultural and social imaginations as well as artistic ones.

AB - In what follows, we do not answer every question [by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics). We first proceed with our comments, referring to the numbered questions as appropriate. Thereafter, we give a case study from recent studies within Cesagen to illustrate more general insights for public policy. Case study 1 illustrates some of the complications that arise in public consultation about human enhancement, in particular, with reference to idealistic perceptions which are strongly influenced by long-term popular imaginations about the future of humans and their societies. As we said in a response to a previous consultation, our position is that attention needs to be paid to how the technologies and the associated issues are framed – ethically, politically, scientifically, and by whom. This includes how a given technology is itself described (typically well before it actually exists, if it comes to do so); the claims made for its purported benefits; how stakeholders are conceptualised; how social-cultural aspects will evolve. Such framing is not exclusively a scientific and technological matter but involves cultural and social imaginations as well as artistic ones.

KW - Human enhancement

KW - Advanced therapies

KW - Implant

KW - Identity

KW - Selfhood

KW - Informational bodies

KW - Body modification

KW - Vulnerability

KW - Bioethics

KW - Pragmatism

KW - Technology convergence

KW - Robotics

KW - ELSi

M3 - Other report

VL - Prepared on behalf of Cesagen.

BT - Cesagen response to Nuffield Council on bioethics consultation on novel neurotechnologies

PB - Lancaster University

ER -