pp 1–11 | Cite as

Is There a Duty to Use Moral Neurointerventions?

  • Michelle CiurriaEmail author


Do we have a duty to use moral neurointerventions to correct deficits in our moral psychology? On their surface, these technologies appear to pose worrisome risks to valuable dimensions of the self, and these risks could conceivably weigh against any prima facie moral duty we have to use these technologies. Focquaert and Schermer (Neuroethics 8(2):139–151, 2015) argue that neurointerventions pose special risks to the self because they operate passively on the subject’s brain, without her active participation, unlike ‘active’ interventions. Some neurointerventions, however, appear to be relatively unproblematic, and some appear to preserve the agent’s sense of self precisely because they operate passively. In this paper, I propose three conditions that need to be met for a medical intervention to be considered low-risk, and I say that these conditions cut across the active/passive divide. A low-risk intervention must: (i) pass pre-clinical and clinical trials, (ii) fare well in post-clinical studies, and (iii) be subject to regulations protecting informed consent. If an intervention passes these tests, its risks do not provide strong countervailing reasons against our prima facie duty to undergo the intervention.


Moral neuroenhancements Moral neurointerventions Informed consent Narrative identity Autonomy Choice 


  1. Arslan-Yildiz A, El Assal R, Chen P, Guven S, Inci F, Demirci U (2016) Towards artificial tissue models: past, present, and future of 3D bioprinting. Biofabrication 8(1):14103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blum A. In Progress. The Ethical and Regulatory Issues Surrounding 3D Bioprinting of Neural Tissue: Future Treatments for Children?Google Scholar
  3. Cikara M, Bruneau E, Van Bavel JJ, Saxe R (2014) Their pain gives us pleasure: how intergroup dynamics shape empathic failures and counter-empathic responses. J Exp Soc Psychol 55:110–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cook MJ, O’Brien TJ, Berkovic SF, Murphy M, Morokoff A, Fabinyi G, D’Souza W (2013) Prediction of seizure likelihood with a long-term, implanted seizure advisory system in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy: a first-in-man study. Lancet 12(6):563–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Dreu CK, Greer LL, van Kleef GA, Shalvi S, Handgraaf JJ (2011) Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism. Proc Nat Acad Sci 108(4):1262–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fecteau S, Pascual-Leone A, Théoret H (2008) Psychopathy and the mirror neuron system: preliminary findings from a non-psychiatric sample. Psychiatry Res 160(2):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fedorovich NE, Alblas J, Hennink WE, Öner FC, Dhert, WJA (2011) Organ printing: the future of bone regeneration? Trends Biotechnol 29(12):601–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Focquaert F, Schermer M (2015) Moral enhancement: do means matter morally? Neuroethics 8(2):139–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Galbally M, Lewis AJ, Ijzendoorn M, Permezel M (2011) The role of oxytocin in mother-infant relations: a systematic review of human studies. Harv Rev Psychiatry 19(1):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hauskeller M (2013) Human nature from a transhumanist perspective. Hum Nat 8(2)Google Scholar
  11. Hoppenbrouwers SS, De Jesus DR, Sun Y, Stirpe T, Hofman D, McMaster J, Schutter DJ 2014. Abnormal interhemispheric connectivity in male psychopathic offenders. J Psychiatry Neurosci, 39(1):22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnson RN (2011) Self-improvement: an essay in kantian ethics. OUP, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jotterand F (2011) ‘Virtue engineering’ and moral agency: will post-humans still need the virtues? Am J Bioeth Neurosci 2(4):3–9Google Scholar
  14. Kim S, Soeken TA, Cromer SJ, Martinez SR, Hardy LR, Strathearn L (2014) Oxytocin and postpartum depression: delivering on what’s known and what’s not. Brain Res 1580:219–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lioa M (2014) Could deep brain stimulation fortify soldiers’ minds? scientific american. Accessed 6 March 2016
  16. Michael S, Sorg H, Peck C-T, Koch L, Deiwick A, Chichkov B, Farhadi J (2013) Tissue engineered skin substitutes created by laser-assisted bioprinting Form skin-like structures in the dorsal skin fold chamber in mice. PLoS ONE 8(3):e57741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mikolajczak M, Gross JJ, Jane L, Corneille O, de Timary P, Luminet O (2010) Oxytocin makes people trusting, not gullible. Psychol Sci 108(4):1072–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mischkowski D, Crocker J, Way BM (2016) From painkiller to empathy killer: acetaminophen (paracetamol) reduces empathy for pain. Soc Cognit Affect Neurosci 11(9):1345–1353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moro E, Lang AE (2006) Criteria for deep-brain stimulation in Parkinson’s disease: review and analysis. Expert Rev Neurother 6(11):1695–1705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Norotte C, Marga FS, Niklason LE, Forgacs G (2009) Scaffold-free vascular tissue engineering using bioprinting. Biomaterials 30(30):5910–5917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Persson I, Sulvanescu J (2008) The perils of cognitive enhancement and the urgent imperative to enhance the moral character of humanity. J Appl Philos 25(3):162–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reim MM, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, van Ijzendoorn MH (2016) Intranasal administration of oxytocin modulates behavioral and amygdala responses to infant crying in females with insecure attachment representations. Attach Hum Dev 18(3):213–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shamay-Tsoory SG, Fischer M, Dvash J, Harari H, Perach-Bloom N, Levkovitz Y (2009) Intranasal administration of oxytocin increases envy and schadenfreude (gloating). Biol Psychiatry 66(9):864–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shroeder T, Roskies AL, Nichols S (2010) Moral motivation. In: Doris J, The Moral Psychology Research Group (eds) The moral psychology handbook, OUP, Oxford, pp 72–110Google Scholar
  25. Thomas GP, Jobst BC (2015) Critical review of the responsive neurostimulator system for epilepsy. Med Devices 8:405–411Google Scholar
  26. Wiseman H (2016) The myth of the moral brain: the limits of moral enhancement. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Zak P (2012) The moral molecule: the new science of what makes us good or evil. Bantam Press, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of New South Wales: Practical Justice InitiativeSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations