The integrated ethics and society programme of the Human Brain Project: reflecting on an ongoing experience

Generative Critique in Interdisciplinary Collaborations: From Critique in and of the Neurosciences to Socio-Technical Integration Research as a Practice of Critique in R(R)I

“…These practices range from constructive technology assessment [115], real-time assessment [116], visions and expectations assessment [117], techno-moral scenarios [118], to specific versions of stakeholder discussion groups [119]. 8 However, they are widely acknowledged to face challenges, in particular a concern about taking a critical stance towards technoscientific practices that neither slips into agonism nor subordination [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. Despite challenges, some practices have been recognised among scholars, policy-makers, scientists, engineers, and other professionals as 'effective' [120][121][122][123].…”

“…Third, they combine knowledge production about technoscientific practices with contribution to change in how technoscientific practitioners identify and engage with socio-ethical dimensions of their work. However, such collaborations are widely acknowledged to face challenges [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. One of the challenges refers to the maintenance of a 'critical' position while being immersed in technoscientific practices.…”

“…Aircardi et al's reflections on their ongoing involvement in the Ethics and Society Subproject of the Human Brain Project reveal that they were concerned about their work being reduced to ethics management. 'It was important to be clear that we were not there to do the ethics for them' ( [23], p. 15); they state to counter associations of their role with service.…”

Neuroethics and Philosophy in Responsible Research and Innovation: The Case of the Human Brain Project

“…This subproject is structured around a number of activities such as initially presented by Stilgoe and Richard Owen [2,4]: foresight analysis uses scenarios construction to identify at an early stage the ethical and social concerns raised both by potential HBP research developments and their implications. It also produces reports to be used as background information by HBP directors, researchers, and other stakeholders [18]. Citizens' engagement promotes involvement with different points of view and strengthens public dialogue with public and private stakeholders via organization of workshops, webinars, and a number of other outreach activities; and ethics management develops principles and mechanisms for their implementation, creates Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs) and ensures that the ethical issues raised by the different research subprojects are transparently communicated and managed and that HBP researchers comply with the relevant ethical codes and legal norms [17,24].…”

“…They are interested in its capacity to enable selfawareness beyond the lab, on how research is formulated and how it responds to social challenges. Bernd Stahl, Ethics director in the Human Brain Project, points to the need for internal reflexivity in order to Bexplore the assumptions and consequences of research^ [16] as do Christine Aicardi and colleagues (also from the HBP) when highlighting the need for scientists and other stakeholders to be reflexive about the commitments that drive them and that shape the outcomes of their research [18] .…”