Taking Relational Authenticity Seriously: Neurotechnologies, Narrative Identity, and Co-Authorship of the Self

Mihailov, Emilian; Zorila, Alexandra; Iftode, Cristian

doi:10.1080/21507740.2020.1866105

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, in contrast to recent works attempting to analyze the normative implications of MMTs in the light of the concept of authenticity that would "take relational nature of personal identity seriously" [8,14,53], I argue, following Mackenzie and Walker 1 PTSD is a psychological disorder which has dramatic consequences for a daily life of affected person. It is characterized by heightened noradrenergic signaling [30], highly disruptive traumatic memories, avoidance, and increased arousal and stress response [31].…”

Section: And Ethical Ramifications Of Such An Intervention Among Othe...mentioning

confidence: 77%

The Ethics of Memory Modification: Personal Narratives, Relational Selves and Autonomy

Zawadzki

2022

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For nearly two decades, ethicists have expressed concerns that the further development and use of memory modification technologies (MMTs)—techniques allowing to intentionally and selectively alter memories—may threaten the very foundations of who we are, our personal identity, and thus pose a threat to our well-being, or even undermine our “humaneness.” This paper examines the potential ramifications of memory-modifying interventions such as changing the valence of targeted memories and selective deactivation of a particular memory as these interventions appear to be at the same time potentially both most promising clinically as well as menacing to identity. However, unlike previous works discussing the potential consequences of MMTs, this article analyzes them in the context of the narrative relational approach to personal identity and potential issues related to autonomy. I argue that such a perspective brings to light the ethical aspects and moral issues arising from the use of MMTs that have been hidden from previously adopted approaches. In particular, this perspective demonstrates how important the social context in which an individual lives is for the ethical evaluation of a given memory-modifying intervention. I conclude by suggesting that undertaking memory modifications without taking into account the social dimension of a person’s life creates the risk that she will not be able to meet one of the basic human needs—the autonomous construction and maintenance of personal identity. Based on this conclusion, I offer some reflections on the permissibility and advisability of MMTs and what these considerations suggest for the future.

show abstract

Section: And Ethical Ramifications Of Such An Intervention Among Othe...mentioning

confidence: 77%

The Ethics of Memory Modification: Personal Narratives, Relational Selves and Autonomy

Zawadzki

2022

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among the novel memory-modifying technologies, invasive brain–computer interfaces (“iBCIs”) that target site-specific neurons through direct contact with neuronal tissue can manipulate neural circuits at high temporal and spatial resolution through, for example, ‘electrical neuromodulation’––a stimulation mechanism of electrical neural signaling––for, in this case, altering memory ( Kozai et al, 2014 ; Ponce, 2014 ; Glannon, 2017 ; Opris, 2017 ; Gulino et al, 2019 ). For instance, a distinguishing feature of iBCIs is the possibility of selectively deactivating or dampening the emotional impact of undesired memories by inhibiting selected groups of neurons ( Kolber, 2008 ; Han et al, 2009 ; Adamczyk and Zawadzki, 2020 ; Costanzi et al, 2021 ; Mihailov et al, 2021 ). Such a prospect of intentionally controlling our forgetting by modulating the stabilization process of a memory trace could erase the sting of bad memories or lessen their emotional intensity at will ( Huff et al, 2013 ; Adamczyk and Zawadzki, 2020 ; Blitz and Barfield, 2023 ; Zawadzki, 2023 ).…”

Section: Current Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Remarkably, ample empirical findings support this theoretical proposal. For instance, research conducted in rodent models and non-human primates has proven effective in deactivating well-consolidated memories and reducing the emotional intensity (or valence) of specific episodes ( Kindt et al, 2009 ; Goshen et al, 2011 ; Lavazza, 2018 ; El-Shamayleh and Horwitz, 2019 ; Adamczyk and Zawadzki, 2020 ; Mihailov et al, 2021 ; Li et al, 2022 ). It should be emphasized that this prospect of advanced memory modulation in humans remains theoretical, primarily due to the ongoing experimental and clinical status of iBCIs.…”

Section: Current Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there is a prevailing concern that neuromodulation technologies could be employed to modify fundamental human value ( Aplin and Fridman, 2019 ; Goering et al, 2021 ), the ethical aftermaths arising from unforeseen side effects remain relatively unexplored from a practical perspective that considers both potential individual and societal ramifications. As the memory-modifying potential at stake is latent ( Won et al, 2020 ; Mihailov et al, 2021 ; Meyer and Benoit, 2022 ), it calls for ethical attention in order to safeguard a responsible development without hindering their promising therapeutic potential ( Zawadzki and Adamczyk, 2021a , b ). To illustrate these points, the study will now introduce a hypothetical case study.…”

Section: Current Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neuromodulation and memory: exploring ethical ramifications in memory modification treatment via implantable neurotechnologies

González-Márquez

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive implantable neurotechnologies capable of simultaneously altering and recording neural activity are no longer the exclusive province of science fiction but a looming reality that will revolutionize medical practice. These advancements, particularly in their memory-altering capabilities, herald a vast array of opportunities for addressing the complex landscape of neurodegenerative and psychiatric conditions linked to memory impairments. However, the panoply of ethical implications arising from such a novel neurotechnology remains relatively unexplored by the neuroethics literature. This study examines and contrasts the potential ethical implications of memory modification treatment via implantable neurotechnologies. The study contends that undesired side effects resulting from memory modulation can lead to significant identity harms, disrupting the coherence of self-narratives and impinging on our authenticity. To evince the practical impact of this moral argument, the study conducts a practical ethical assessment of how employing implantable neurotechnologies to modulate memory may jeopardize (i) our moral responsiveness to events and core system of values and (ii) the emotional component associated with the altered memory. From a first-person standpoint, changes to the way we reasonably feel and react to past events and future intentions may be deemed ethically problematic as these profound changes can yield significant moral disruptions and negatively impact our personal lives and interpersonal relationships. In addition, the study discusses further ethical conundrums from a third-person perspective as these disruptions can inhibit social activism against structural injustices, thereby hindering societal progress. Thus, taking into account this societal dimension is paramount when evaluating the ethical permissibility of memory modification procedures.

show abstract

“…We have to deal with the stories others tell about ourselves. By deleting the own perspective, we can no longer contradict the views of others or contribute to a fuller picture [ 91 ]. Thereby, the self-narrative becomes more prone to inaccuracy and manipulation.…”

Section: Memory Modification and Authenticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory Modification and Authenticity: A Narrative Approach

Leuenberger

2022

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential of memory modification techniques (MMTs) has raised concerns and sparked a debate in neuroethics, particularly in the context of identity and authenticity. This paper addresses the question whether and how MMTs influence authenticity. I proceed by drawing two distinctions within the received views on authenticity. From this, I conclude that an analysis of MMTs based on a dual-basis, process view of authenticity is warranted, which implies that the influence of MMTs on authenticity crucially depends on the specifics of how memory modification would eventually work. Therefore, I continue with a systematic analysis of possible properties of MMTs in which I distinguish between the dimensions of memories and the kinds of experiences that can be modified as well as the properties of the process of memory modification. The impact of MMTs on authenticity is analyzed regarding the possible properties of MMTs and based on a narrative approach to authenticity which fulfills the requirements of a dual-basis, process view of authenticity. Lastly, I explore the potential of MMTs to shift the balance between self-discovery and self-creation within authenticity and thereby alter the concept itself as well as the value of authenticity.

show abstract

Taking Relational Authenticity Seriously: Neurotechnologies, Narrative Identity, and Co-Authorship of the Self

Cited by 13 publications

References 9 publications

The Ethics of Memory Modification: Personal Narratives, Relational Selves and Autonomy

The Ethics of Memory Modification: Personal Narratives, Relational Selves and Autonomy

Neuromodulation and memory: exploring ethical ramifications in memory modification treatment via implantable neurotechnologies

Memory Modification and Authenticity: A Narrative Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About