Advertisement

Neuroethics

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 37–43 | Cite as

Personal Identity, Direction of Change, and Neuroethics

  • Kevin Patrick Tobia
Original Paper

Abstract

The personal identity relation is of great interest to philosophers, who often consider fictional scenarios to test what features seem to make persons persist through time. But often real examples of neuroscientific interest also provide important tests of personal identity. One such example is the case of Phineas Gage – or at least the story often told about Phineas Gage. Many cite Gage’s story as example of severed personal identity; Phineas underwent such a tremendous change that Gage “survived as a different man.” I discuss a recent empirical finding about judgments about this hypothetical. It is not just the magnitude of the change that affects identity judgment; it is also the negative direction of the change. I present an experiment suggesting that direction of change (improvement or deterioration) also affects neuroethical judgments. I conclude we should consider carefully the way in which improvements and deteriorations affect attributions of personal identity. This is particularly important since a number of the most crucial neuroethical decisions involve varieties of cognitive enhancements (improvements) or deteriorations.

Keywords

Advance directive Deterioration Enhancement Improvement Personal identity Neuroethics Neurodegeneration Phineas gage Self 

References

  1. 1.
    Locke, J. 1690. “Of identity and diversity,” in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Parfit, D. 1971. Personal identity. The Philosophical Review 80(1): 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Williams, B. 1970. The self and the future. The Philosophical Review 161–180.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Damasio, H., T. Grabowski, R. Frank, A. Galaburda, and A. Damasio. 1994. The return of Phineas gage: clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient. Science 264(5162): 1102–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harlow, J. 1868. Recovery from the passage of an iron bar through the head. Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society 2: 327–347.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Macmillan, M. 2000. Restoring Phineas gage: a 150th retrospective. Journal of the History of the Neurosciences 9(1): 46–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Macmillan, M. 2002. An odd kind of fame: stories of Phineas gage. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murphy, N. 2013. Do humans have souls? Perspective from philosophy, science, and religion. Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology 67(1): 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rabins, P.V., and D.M. Blass. 2009. A neurobiology of personal identity. In Personal identity and fractured selves: perspectives from philosophy, ethics, and neuroscience, eds. D.J. Mathews, H. Bok, and P.V. Rabins. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Searle, J. 2005. “The self as a problem in philosophy and neurobiology,” in The Lost Self: Pathologies of the Brain and Identity, ed. T. Feinberg and J. Keenan. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnston, M. 1987. Human beings. Journal of Philosophy 84: 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noonan, H. 1998. Animalism versus lockeanism: a current controversy. Philosophical Quarterly 48: 302–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shoemaker, S. 1984. Personal identity: a materialist’s account. In Personal identity, eds. S. Shoemaker, and S. Swinburne. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thomson, J.J. 1997. People and their bodies. In Reading parfit, ed. J. Dancy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wiggins, D. 1976. Locke, butler and the stream of consciousness: and men as a natural kind. In The identities of persons, ed. A. Rorty. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Williams, B. 1956. Personal Identity and Individuation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society: 229–252.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    DeGrazia, D. 2005. Human identity and bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    MacIntyre, A. 1984. After virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schechtman, M. 1996. The constitution of selves. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Taylor, C. 1989. Sources of the self: the making of modern identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Campbell, S. 1997. Interpreting the personal: expression and the formation of feelings. Ithaca,: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Campbell, S. 2003. Relational remembering: rethinking the memory wars. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lindemann, H. 2010. “Holding one another (well,wrongly, clumsily) in a time of dementia.”. In Cognitive disability and its challenge to moral philosophy, Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, vol 2010, eds. E.F. Kittay, and L. Carlson, 161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wilson, R.A., and B.A. Lenart. 2015. “Extended mind and identity.”. In Handbook of neuroethics, eds. Jens Clausen, and Neil Levy, 423–439. Oxford: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Butler, J. 1736. Of personal identity. The analogy of religion, natural and revealed, to the constitution and course of nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reid, T. 1785. “Of identity,” in Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shoemaker, D. 2011. Moral responsibility and the self. In Oxford handbook of the self, ed. S. Gallagher. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mott, C. Unpublished manuscript. Statutes of Limitations and the Connectedness of the Self.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tobia, K.P. 2015. Personal identity and the Phineas gage effect. Analysis 75(3): 396–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Newman, G.E., P. Bloom, and J. Knobe. 2014. Value judgments and the true self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2): 203–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Newman, G.E., J. De Freitas, and J. Knobe. 2015. Beliefs about the true self explain asymmetries based on moral judgment. Cognitive Science 39(1): 96–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Molouki, S. and Bartels, D.M. Unpublished manuscript. Personal Change and the Continuity of Identity.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    De Freitas J., Tobia, K., Newman, G., and Knobe, J. 2016. Normative judgments and individual essence. Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gregory, E. 2009. Religion and bioethics. In A companion to bioethics, eds. P. Singer, and H. Kuhs. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Farah, M.J. 2010. Neuroethics: an overview. In Neuroethics, an introduction with readings, ed. M. Farah. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Savalescu, J. 2009. Genetic enhancement. In A companion to bioethics, eds. P. Singer, and H. Kuhs. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lipsman, N., R. Zener, and M. Bernstein. 2009. Personal identity, enhancement and neurosurgery: a qualitative study in applied neuroethics. Bioethics 23(6): 375–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Strohminger, N., and S. Nichols. 2015. Neurodegeneration and identity. Psychological Science 26(9): 1469–1479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Buchanan, A. 1988. Advance directives and the personal identity problem. Philosophy & Public Affairs 17(4): 277–302.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Capron, A.M. 2009. Advance directives. In A companion to bioethics, eds. P. Singer, and H. Kuhs. Oxford:Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bostrom, N., and T. Ord. 2006. The reversal test: eliminating status Quo bias in applied ethics. Ethics 116: 656–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Baylis, F. 2015. “Neuroethics and Identity.” In J. Clausen and N. Levy (Eds.) Handbook of Neuroethics: 367–372.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brand, C. 2009. Am I still me? Personal identity in neuroethical debates. Medicine Studies 1(4): 393–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Chandler, J. 2015. “Mind, Brain, and Law: Issues at the Intersection of Neuroscience, Personal Identity, and the Legal System.” In J. Clausen and N. Levy (Eds.) Handbook of Neuroethics: 441–458.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Klaming, L., and P. Haselager. 2013. Did my brain implant make me do it? Questions raised by DBS regarding psychological continuity, responsibility for action and mental competence. Neuroethics 6(3): 527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kraemer, F. 2013. Me, myself and my brain implant: deep brain stimulation raises questions of personal authenticity and alienation. Neuroethics 6(3): 483–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Levy, N. 2007. Rethinking neuroethics in the light of the extended mind thesis. The American Journal of Bioethics 7(9): 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Levy, N., and S. Clarke. 2008. Neuroethics and psychiatry. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 21(6): 568–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Naffine, N. 2009. The subjective brain, identity, and neuroethics: a legal perspective. The American Journal of Bioethics 9(9): 30–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Northoff, G. 2004. The influence of brain implants on personal identity and personality—a combined theoretical and empirical investigation in ‘neuroethics’. In Philosophy and psychiatry, 326, eds. T. Schramme, and J. Thome. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pascalev, A., M. Pascalev, and J. Giordano. 2015. Head transplants, personal identity and neuroethics. Neuroethics 1–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Yale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations