Bioethicist Jonathan Moreno Talks Jacked-In Soldiers And Military Neuroscience

pigrabbitbear writes "Who's driving a lot of neuro research? The military. Much of it is health related, like figuring out how to make prosthetics work more seamlessly and helping diagnose brain injuries. But the military's involvement highlights the basic ethical quandary of neurological development: When our brains pretty much define who we are, what happens when you start adding tech in there? And what happens when you take it away? Jonathan Moreno is quite possibly the top bioethicist in the country, and along with Michael Tennison, recently penned a fascinating essay on the role and ethics of using neuroscience for national security. He also recently updated his book Mind Wars, a seminal look into the military's work with the brain. In this interview he discusses brain implants, drones, and what will happen when military tech hits the civilian world."

Comments

"top bioethicist "?

[jbmartin6]

What sort of selection process is used to determine who is the 'top' bioethicist? Anyone at all can consider the ethical implications of brain implants.

Re:"top bioethicist "?

[Thanshin]

We put all candidates in a sealed arena, each one with a fully equipped lab. Labs are only connected by the air they breathe.

The last one standing becomes the new top bioethicist.

It's not very fair, but nobody wants to argue with the top bioethicist.

Re:"top bioethicist "?

[Rogerborg]

Operating Thetan level? Hmm, does a bioethicist use arcane or divine spellcasting levels?

Not a serious question, of course: if your self appointed job title is "bioethicist", then your self appointed job is to tell people what's right and what's wrong, and that's obviously a priest class.

Do we have any kings left that we can strangle with his entrails?

I'm not surprised

[Zandamesh]

As it is now, the greatest tool(weapon) we have lies between our ears, more powerful than the fastest jets and the biggest bombs, and anything that improves it to perform certain tasks better is an option. So genetic manipulation, chips in brains, anything. Because if you don't, then someone else will and then you lose.

I'm guessing most of this is done in secrecy to prevent public outcries.

Re:What will happen???

[GrpA]

Anthropomorphic Vehicle Control (AVC) -

When the driver *becomes* the vehicle... See's through the vehicles cameras and feels and controls the vehicle like it's their own body.

Currently under development, but you can get an idea what it's like from this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Turing-Evolved-ebook/dp/B007GTWLDW/ref=zg_tr_158595011_4

It talks about other vehicles ( aircraft, ground, water etc ) but mostly about DEMONs - Direct Engagement Military Offensive Neurosuit.

That's pretty much where I think it's headed - the book is free at the moment, BTW. Other formats: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/34627

GrpA

Re:We alter our brains all the time

[ColdWetDog]

It's quite a bit harder to hack into food and control you. It's also a lot easier to revert to your previous state...just change diet.

We're talking caffeine here - there is no 'just change' anything.

Without caffeine, life would not be possible.

Re:Cyberpsychosis

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Elizabeth Moon, author of an extensive corpus of Science Fiction, opines for the BBC: "If I were empress of the Universe I would insist on every individual having a unique ID permanently attached -- a barcode if you will; an implanted chip to provide an easy, fast inexpensive way to identify individuals. It would be imprinted on everyone at birth. Point the scanner at someone and there it is. ... In war soldiers could easily differentiate legitimate targets in a population from non combatants... Anonymity would be impossible as would mistaken identity making it easier to place responsibility accurately, not only in war but also in non-combat situations far from the war."
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120522-barcode-everyone-at-birth

Re:We alter our brains all the time

[pushing-robot]

It's also funny that we spend the first 2-3 decades of life being trained and educated in a deliberate attempt to modify our brains...to the point that any parent who wants their child to exist in a "natural" human state would be sent to prison for child abuse. We pride ourselves on being "civilized", and redefine "human" to mean denying our biological nature. Society is founded on that principle, and while as a people we try to modify ourselves to become more intelligent and compassionate, education-turned-indoctrination can also make us into monsters, and even the most liberal societies train us to accept certain injustices.

So when they say technology can change who we are, I suggest that we have been excelling at changing who we are for thousands of years. Whether a particular technique is "good" or "bad" in a moral sense depends on whether it stirs or stunts our capacity for empathy, and whether it encourages us to grow and diversify or enforces a rigid set of behavior.