Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; : 1-10, 2024 Jan 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38220470

ABSTRACT

In the ethics of algorithms, a specifically epistemological analysis is rarely undertaken in order to gain a critique (or a defense) of the handling of or trust in medical black box algorithms (BBAs). This article aims to begin to fill this research gap. Specifically, the thesis is examined according to which such algorithms are regarded as epistemic authorities (EAs) and that the results of a medical algorithm must completely replace other convictions that patients have (preemptionism). If this were true, it would be a reason to distrust medical BBAs. First, the author describes what EAs are and why BBAs can be considered EAs. Then, preemptionism will be outlined and criticized as an answer to the question of how to deal with an EA. The discussion leads to some requirements for dealing with a BBA as an EA.

2.
J Neural Eng ; 16(6): 063001, 2019 11 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31394509

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Scientists, engineers, and healthcare professionals are currently developing a variety of new devices under the category of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Current and future applications are both medical/assistive (e.g. for communication) and non-medical (e.g. for gaming). This array of possibilities has been met with both enthusiasm and ethical concern in various media, with no clear resolution of these conflicting sentiments. APPROACH: To better understand how BCIs may either harm or help the user, and to investigate whether ethical guidance is required, a meeting entitled 'BCIs and Personhood: A Deliberative Workshop' was held in May 2018. MAIN RESULTS: We argue that the hopes and fears associated with BCIs can be productively understood in terms of personhood, specifically the impact of BCIs on what it means to be a person and to be recognized as such by others. SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings suggest that the development of neural technologies raises important questions about the concept of personhood and its role in society. Accordingly, we propose recommendations for BCI development and governance.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Technology/trends , Brain-Computer Interfaces/trends , Communication Aids for Disabled/trends , Personhood , Biomedical Technology/methods , Brain-Computer Interfaces/psychology , Communication , Communication Aids for Disabled/psychology , Education/methods , Education/trends , Humans
4.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 27(4): 635-646, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30198466

ABSTRACT

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are driven essentially by algorithms; however, the ethical role of such algorithms has so far been neglected in the ethical assessment of BCIs. The goal of this article is therefore twofold: First, it aims to offer insights into whether (and how) the problems related to the ethics of BCIs (e.g., responsibility) can be better grasped with the help of already existing work on the ethics of algorithms. As a second goal, the article explores what kinds of solutions are available in that body of scholarship, and how these solutions relate to some of the ethical questions around BCIs. In short, the article asks what lessons can be learned about the ethics of BCIs from looking at the ethics of algorithms. To achieve these goals, the article proceeds as follows. First, a brief introduction into the algorithmic background of BCIs is given. Second, the debate about epistemic concerns and the ethics of algorithms is sketched. Finally, this debate is transferred to the ethics of BCIs.


Subject(s)
Algorithms , Bioethical Issues , Brain-Computer Interfaces/ethics , Humans , Neurosciences/ethics , Social Responsibility
5.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics ; 27(4): 675-685, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30198470

ABSTRACT

Some authors have questioned the moral authority of advance directives (ADs) in cases in which it is not clear if the author of the AD is identical to the person to whom it later applies. This article focuses on the question of whether the latest results of neuroimaging studies have moral significance with regard to the moral authority of ADs in patients with disorders of consciousness (DOCs). Some neuroimaging findings could provide novel insights into the question of whether patients with DOCs exhibit sufficient psychological continuity to be ascribed diachronic personal identity. If those studies were to indicate that psychological continuity is present, they could justify the moral authority of ADs in patients with DOCs. This holds at least if respect for self-determination is considered as the foundation for the moral authority of ADs. The non-identity thesis in DOCs could no longer be applied, in line with clinical and social practice.


Subject(s)
Advance Directives/ethics , Bioethical Issues , Consciousness Disorders/diagnostic imaging , Neuroimaging/ethics , Advance Directive Adherence/ethics , Humans , Neurosciences/ethics , Persistent Vegetative State/diagnostic imaging , Personhood
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...