Cognitive Enhancement as Transformative Experience: The Challenge of Wrapping One's Mind Around Enhanced Cognition via Neurostimulation.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Paul A Tubig, Eran Klein
{"title":"Cognitive Enhancement as Transformative Experience: The Challenge of Wrapping One's Mind Around Enhanced Cognition via Neurostimulation.","authors":"Paul A Tubig, Eran Klein","doi":"10.1017/S0963180124000057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this paper, the authors explore the question of whether cognitive enhancement via direct neurostimulation, such as through deep brain stimulation, could be reasonably characterized as a form of transformative experience. This question is inspired by a qualitative study being conducted with people at risk of developing dementia and in intimate relationships with people living with dementia (PLWD). They apply L.A. Paul's work on transformative experience to the question of cognitive enhancement and explore potential limitations on the kind of claims that can legitimately be made about individual well-being and flourishing, as well as limit the kind of empirical work-including the authors' own-that can hope to enlighten ethical discourse. In this paper, the authors advance the following theses: (1) it is sometimes reasonable to characterize cognitive enhancement as a transformative experience; (2) the testimonies of people intimately acquainted with dementia may still be relevant to evaluating cognitive enhancement even though cognitive enhancement may be a transformative experience; and (3) qualitative studies may still be useful in the ethical analysis of cognitive enhancement, but special attention may need to be given to how these are conducted and what kind of insights can be drawn from them.</p>","PeriodicalId":55300,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180124000057","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, the authors explore the question of whether cognitive enhancement via direct neurostimulation, such as through deep brain stimulation, could be reasonably characterized as a form of transformative experience. This question is inspired by a qualitative study being conducted with people at risk of developing dementia and in intimate relationships with people living with dementia (PLWD). They apply L.A. Paul's work on transformative experience to the question of cognitive enhancement and explore potential limitations on the kind of claims that can legitimately be made about individual well-being and flourishing, as well as limit the kind of empirical work-including the authors' own-that can hope to enlighten ethical discourse. In this paper, the authors advance the following theses: (1) it is sometimes reasonable to characterize cognitive enhancement as a transformative experience; (2) the testimonies of people intimately acquainted with dementia may still be relevant to evaluating cognitive enhancement even though cognitive enhancement may be a transformative experience; and (3) qualitative studies may still be useful in the ethical analysis of cognitive enhancement, but special attention may need to be given to how these are conducted and what kind of insights can be drawn from them.

作为变革性体验的认知增强:通过神经刺激增强认知的挑战。
在本文中,作者探讨了这样一个问题:通过直接神经刺激(如深部脑刺激)增强认知能力是否可以被合理地描述为一种变革性体验。这个问题的灵感来自于一项定性研究,研究对象是有患痴呆症风险的人以及与痴呆症患者(PLWD)有亲密关系的人。他们将保罗(L.A. Paul)关于转换性体验的研究成果应用于认知增强问题,并探讨了关于个人福祉和繁荣的合理主张可能存在的局限性,同时也探讨了希望启迪伦理讨论的实证研究--包括作者自己的研究--可能存在的局限性。在本文中,作者提出了以下论点:(1) 将认知增强定性为一种转变性体验有时是合理的;(2) 即使认知增强可能是一种转变性体验,但与痴呆症密切相关的人的证词可能仍然与评估认知增强相关;(3) 定性研究可能仍然有助于对认知增强进行伦理分析,但可能需要特别注意如何进行这些研究以及从这些研究中可以得出什么样的见解。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics is designed to address the challenges of biology, medicine and healthcare and to meet the needs of professionals serving on healthcare ethics committees in hospitals, nursing homes, hospices and rehabilitation centres. The aim of the journal is to serve as the international forum for the wide range of serious and urgent issues faced by members of healthcare ethics committees, physicians, nurses, social workers, clergy, lawyers and community representatives.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信