作为变革经验的记忆消除:重新考虑神经技术干预的道德意义。

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Junjie Yang
{"title":"作为变革经验的记忆消除:重新考虑神经技术干预的道德意义。","authors":"Junjie Yang","doi":"10.1136/medhum-2025-013373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We now possess various neurotechnologies that precisely modulate the nervous system. Among these, memory erasure technology (MET), aiming to weaken or eliminate traumatic memories via neuropharmacology, neurostimulation and optogenetics, has sparked intense ethical debate. At its core, the ethical complexity of MET stems from foundational questions about its moral significance. A neurophenomenological approach reveals that MET generates experiences that are epistemically and personally transformative, thereby influencing the process of decision-making. At the individual ethical level, the consequences of MET are difficult to assess rationally, as individuals make transformative choices amid profound uncertainty regarding how their experiential and value frameworks may shift in the future. At the social ethical level, MET challenges the legal, historical, distributive and epistemic dimensions of justice related to memory, while its transformative potential simultaneously offers opportunities to transcend existing forms of injustice. Thus, the argument that MET is morally unacceptable because it deviates from natural forgetting fundamentally misunderstands the basis of its ethical implications. The moral significance of MET is neither instrumental nor contextual; rather, it resides in the inherent capacity of neurotechnological interventions to generate transformative experiences that fundamentally reshape human moral decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":46435,"journal":{"name":"Medical Humanities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Memory erasure as transformative experience: reconsidering the moral significance of neurotechnological interventions.\",\"authors\":\"Junjie Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/medhum-2025-013373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We now possess various neurotechnologies that precisely modulate the nervous system. Among these, memory erasure technology (MET), aiming to weaken or eliminate traumatic memories via neuropharmacology, neurostimulation and optogenetics, has sparked intense ethical debate. At its core, the ethical complexity of MET stems from foundational questions about its moral significance. A neurophenomenological approach reveals that MET generates experiences that are epistemically and personally transformative, thereby influencing the process of decision-making. At the individual ethical level, the consequences of MET are difficult to assess rationally, as individuals make transformative choices amid profound uncertainty regarding how their experiential and value frameworks may shift in the future. At the social ethical level, MET challenges the legal, historical, distributive and epistemic dimensions of justice related to memory, while its transformative potential simultaneously offers opportunities to transcend existing forms of injustice. Thus, the argument that MET is morally unacceptable because it deviates from natural forgetting fundamentally misunderstands the basis of its ethical implications. The moral significance of MET is neither instrumental nor contextual; rather, it resides in the inherent capacity of neurotechnological interventions to generate transformative experiences that fundamentally reshape human moral decision-making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46435,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Humanities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2025-013373\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2025-013373","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们现在拥有各种精确调节神经系统的神经技术。其中,记忆消除技术(memory erasure technology, MET)旨在通过神经药理学、神经刺激和光遗传学等手段削弱或消除创伤记忆,引发了激烈的伦理争论。在其核心,MET的伦理复杂性源于其道德意义的基本问题。神经现象学方法揭示,MET产生的经验是认识论和个人变革,从而影响决策过程。在个人道德层面上,MET的后果很难理性评估,因为个人在不确定的情况下做出了变革性的选择,他们的经验和价值框架在未来可能会如何变化。在社会伦理层面,MET挑战了与记忆相关的正义的法律、历史、分配和认知维度,同时它的变革潜力也提供了超越现有形式的不公正的机会。因此,认为MET在道德上是不可接受的,因为它偏离了自然遗忘,这种观点从根本上误解了其伦理含义的基础。MET的道德意义既不是工具性的,也不是情境性的;相反,它存在于神经技术干预产生从根本上重塑人类道德决策的变革性体验的内在能力中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Memory erasure as transformative experience: reconsidering the moral significance of neurotechnological interventions.

We now possess various neurotechnologies that precisely modulate the nervous system. Among these, memory erasure technology (MET), aiming to weaken or eliminate traumatic memories via neuropharmacology, neurostimulation and optogenetics, has sparked intense ethical debate. At its core, the ethical complexity of MET stems from foundational questions about its moral significance. A neurophenomenological approach reveals that MET generates experiences that are epistemically and personally transformative, thereby influencing the process of decision-making. At the individual ethical level, the consequences of MET are difficult to assess rationally, as individuals make transformative choices amid profound uncertainty regarding how their experiential and value frameworks may shift in the future. At the social ethical level, MET challenges the legal, historical, distributive and epistemic dimensions of justice related to memory, while its transformative potential simultaneously offers opportunities to transcend existing forms of injustice. Thus, the argument that MET is morally unacceptable because it deviates from natural forgetting fundamentally misunderstands the basis of its ethical implications. The moral significance of MET is neither instrumental nor contextual; rather, it resides in the inherent capacity of neurotechnological interventions to generate transformative experiences that fundamentally reshape human moral decision-making.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Humanities
Medical Humanities HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Occupational and Environmental Medicine (OEM) is an international peer reviewed journal concerned with areas of current importance in occupational medicine and environmental health issues throughout the world. Original contributions include epidemiological, physiological and psychological studies of occupational and environmental health hazards as well as toxicological studies of materials posing human health risks. A CPD/CME series aims to help visitors in continuing their professional development. A World at Work series describes workplace hazards and protetctive measures in different workplaces worldwide. A correspondence section provides a forum for debate and notification of preliminary findings.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信