The contribution of neuroethics to international brain research initiatives (original) (raw)

Nature Reviews Neuroscience volume 18, pages 1–2 (2017) Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Neuroethics research can contribute a level of conceptual clarity to international brain research initiatives that is essential for their ethics management as well as for the interpretations, applications and management of their emerging neuroscientific findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$209.00 per year

only $17.42 per issue

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

References

  1. The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. Gray matters: integrative approaches for neuroscience, ethics and society Vol. 1 bioethics.govhttp://www.bioethics.gov/sites/default/files/Gray%20Matters%20Vol%201.pdf (2014).
  2. The Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. Gray matters: topics at the intersection of neuroscience, ethics and society Vol. 2 bioethics.govhttp://bioethics.gov/sites/default/files/GrayMatter_V2_508.pdf (2015).
  3. Rose, N. et al. Data protection and privacy. humanbrainproject.euhttps://www.humanbrainproject.eu/documents/10180/1384155/EthicsandSocietyOpinionDataProtectionandPrivacy.pdf/3612d948-fc33-4e57-baf3-a9cfe2cd673c (2016).
  4. Evers, K. Toward a philosophy for neuroethics. EMBO Rep. 8, S48–S51 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  5. Evers, K. in Open Mind: Philosophy and the Mind Sciences in the 21st Century (eds Metzinger, T. & Windt, J. M.) (MIT Press, 2016).
    Google Scholar
  6. Evers K. & Changeux, J.-P. Proactive epigenesis and ethical innovation: a neuronal hypothesis for the genesis of ethical rules. EMBO Rep. 17, 1361–1364 (2016).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  7. Dudai, Y. & Evers, K. To simulate or not to simulate: what are the questions? Neuron 84, 254–261 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  8. Farisco, M. & Evers, K. (eds) Neurotechnology and Direct Brain Communication. New Insights and Responsibilities Concerning Speechless but Communicative Subjects (Routledge, 2016).
    Book Google Scholar
  9. Evers K. Neurotechnological assessment of consciousness disorders: five ethical imperatives. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. 18, 155–162 (2016).
    PubMed Central Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 720270 (Human Brain Project (HBP) SGA1). The author thanks J.-P. Changeux, M. Farisco and A. Salles for their contributions to this Comment, and K. Ramos, US National Institutes of Health (NIH), for editing the information on the US BRAIN (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies) Initiative.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics (CRB), Uppsala University, P.O. Box 564, Uppsala, SE-751 22, Sweden
    Kathinka Evers

Corresponding author

Correspondence toKathinka Evers.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Evers, K. The contribution of neuroethics to international brain research initiatives.Nat Rev Neurosci 18, 1–2 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.143

Download citation

This article is cited by