Applied Metascience of Neuroethics a Commentary on Paul M

Applied Metascience of Neuroethics A Commentary on Paul M. Churchland

Hannes Boelsen

This commentary is the first case study in the applied metascience of neuroethics, Commentator that is, the application of a metascientific approach to neuroethical research. I apply a bottom-up approach to neuroethics to Churchland’s publication. The bottom- Hannes Boelsen up approach to neuroethics is a quantitative approach (based on scientometric [email protected] methods) that, among other things, allows us to outline the field from 1995 until 2012 through the development of fifteen subject categories or topic prototypes. Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Each subject category or topic prototype is defined by up to thirty-one keywords Mainz, Germany that appear frequently in the abstracts and titles of the publications in the Mainz neuroethics bibliography. The connection strength between two subject categories Target Author or topic prototypes depends upon the number of shared publications, that is, the number of publications that can be assimilated to both subject categories or topic Paul M. Churchland prototypes. Accordingly, a keyword-based search of the abstract and title of any [email protected] publication in neuroethics allows us to assimilate it to (at least) one subject cat- University of California egory or topic prototype and, thereby, localize it within neuroethics and reveal its San Diego, CA, U.S.A. degrees of relevance to neuroethical research, as measured by the connection strengths between the subject categories or topic prototypes. A case study on Editors Churchland’s publication led to the following results: the publication is localized in the subject category or topic prototype Moral Theory, has high degrees of rel- Thomas Metzinger evance to research that can be assimilated to the subject categories or topic pro- [email protected] totypes Neuroimaging, Philosophy of Mind and Consciousness, and Economic and Social Neuroscience, and has low degrees of relevance to research that can Johannes Gutenberg-Universität be assimilated to the subject categories or topic prototypes Addiction, Brain Mainz, Germany Death and Severe Disorders of Consciousness, Brain Stimulation, Enhancement, Legal Studies, (Medical) Research and Medicine, Molecular Neurobiology and Jennifer M. Windt Genetics, Neuroscience and Society, Neurosurgery, Psychiatric and Neurodegen- jennifer.windt@ monash.edu erative Diseases and Disorders, and Psychopharmacology. Such results can be Monash University fed back into neuroethical research, which, in turn, can optimize neuroethics itself Melbourne, Australia and, hence, improve our pursuit of moral understanding. The take-home messages are as follows: potential follow-up studies on Churchland’s publication should consider my case study results and analysis and, furthermore, future neuroethical research should be more careful to take applied metascience of neuroethics into account. This can be done at different stages of research. If this general idea is on the right track, then applied metascience of neuroethics is complementary to (and perhaps even extends) Churchland’s argument, only on a different level.

1 Introduction

In Rules: The basis of morality…?, Churchland ing rules and the sources of their authority. points at several problems for classical rule- Those problems (all based on the fundamental based accounts of moral knowledge that at- assumption that rules in the literal sense re- tempt to identify morally valid behavior-guid- quire a language) show that we need a non-

Boelsen, H. (2015). Applied Metascience of Neuroethics - A Commentary on Paul M. Churchland. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds). Open MIND: 6(C). Frankfurt am Main: MIND Group. doi: 10.15502/9783958570580 1 | 9 www.open-mind.net classical non-rule-based account of moral metascientific approach to neuroethical re- knowledge. Hence, the author proposes an al- search.1 ternative account from computational neuros- In this commentary, I apply the (as-yet cience based on “the best hypothesis currently unpublished) bottom-up approach to NE2 available for how the brain both represents offered by Hildt et al. (forthcoming)3 to Church- and processes information about the world […] land’s publication. Thereby, I attempt to [and] of how the brain learns” (Churchland achieve my epistemic goal, which is both to loc- this collection, p. 8; emphasis omitted): paral- alize the publication within NE and reveal its lel distributed processing (PDP). In PDP, a degrees of relevance4 to neuroethical research; as neural network embodies a conceptual frame- well as my argumentative goal, which is to work that contains knowledge about the demonstrate that applied metascience of NE world, that is, a configuration of attractor re- can optimize NE itself and, hence, improve our gions, a family of prototype representations, pursuit of moral understanding. or, rather, a hierarchy of categories (Church- In the following, I introduce NE and land 2012, p. 33): against this background, present three typical examples of (disadvantage- moral knowledge is a configuration of synaptic ous) contemporary top-down approaches to NE. weights in a neural network. Subsequently, I then introduce a bottom-up approach to NE. this insight is used to reconceive moral com- Following this, I apply the bottom-up approach petence, moral conflict, and moral reasoning. to NE to Churchland’s publication and present Moral competence is the personal level com- my case study results. After this, I analyze my petence to apply sub-personal level knowledge case study results. Finally, I conclude with some to a moral situation by assimilating it to a suggestions for future research. prior learned category or prototype. A moral conflict, however, is (at least partly) the con- 2 Top-down approaches to neuroethics sequence of a moral situation that has been assimilated to a category or prototype of NE, as a combination of applied ethics5 and which it is not an instance. In short, the fal- neurophilosophy6 (Hildt 2012, p. 11), is an inter- libility of moral cognition leads to competing disciplinary field at the intersection of neuros- interpretations of a moral situation and cience, medicine, and philosophy that deals with thereby to a disagreement with others. Ac- philosophical, ethical, anthropological, and socio- cordingly, moral reasoning is (at least mostly) cultural issues related to neuroscience (Metzinger not about rules and the sources of their au- 2012, p. 36). In 2002, this versatile field emerged thority but about adequate assimilation of a in the wake of several US-American conferences moral situation to a category or prototype in that were products of the Zeitgeist, that is, the the first place. Finally, the author concludes: Decade of the Brain from 1990 to 1999 (Hildt “[k]nowing how the brain works to generate 1 In general, applied metascience is not limited to NE, but can be per- and constantly improve our moral understand- formed with any kind of scientific discipline. ing will not obviate the need to keep it work- 2 A bottom-up approach to NE is data-driven, whereas a top-down approach to NE is definition-seeking. ing toward that worthy end, though it may 3 I would like to thank my colleagues in the Mainz Research Group on help us to improve our pursuit thereof” Neuroethics/Neurophilosophy for providing me the opportunity to (Churchland this collection, p. 13; emphasis use the bottom-up approach to NE for the purpose of this commentary. omitted). 4 The degrees of relevance of publications to neuroethical research, as Churchland’s publication has my full sup- measured by the connection strengths between the subject categories or topic prototypes, indicate the probabilities that publications will port. I agree with what he says, as I do with his prove fruitful for neuroethical research. general approach. What follows is a comple- 5 NE is neither another branch of applied ethics (Levy 2011, p. 3) nor reducible to medicine ethics, bioethics, or a subfield thereof. Never- mentary (and perhaps even extending) attempt theless, there is much overlap (Hildt 2012, pp. 11–12) between these to improve our pursuit of moral understanding, fields. only on a different level: applied metascience of 6 Neurophilosophy is a naturalistic and reductive approach towards a unified theory of the mind–brain that requires detailed knowledge neuroethics (NE), that is, the application of a about neuroscience (Walter 2013, p. 133).

2012, p. 9). In particular, it is common to identify ample, in healthcare and social practices (Racine the dawn of NE with a conference that was held 2008, p. 32). in San Francisco on May 13th and 14th, 2002: From a healthcare-driven perspective (Ra- Neuroethics: Mapping the Field (Marcus 2002). cine 2008, p. 33), Racine & Illes (2008) propose a Before this, “most people saw no need for any definition of NE that “profiles the field as at the such field” (Levy 2007, p. 1), but the aforemen- intersection of neuroscience and bioethics defined tioned issues came to be perceived as far more by a general practical goal, that of improving pa- important at this time. Nevertheless, we should tient care for specific patient populations” (Ra- ask: what exactly is NE? Alongside the first ap- cine 2008, p. 34). This top-down approach to NE proximation given above, I present three typical emphasizes the field as “both a scholarly and examples of contemporary top-down approaches practical endeavor, akin to medicine, which at- to NE (which I don’t claim to be exhaustive). tempts to understand and intervene” (Racine From a knowledge-driven perspective (Ra- 2008, p. 34). cine 2008, p. 33), Roskies divides NE into two di- In sum, each of the three top-down ap- visions: the ethics of neuroscience and the neuros- proaches to NE comprises (despite their conver- cience of ethics. According to Levy, the former gences) different issues in different subject cat- “seeks to develop an ethical framework for regu- egories or topic prototypes with different relations lating the conduct of neuroscientific enquiry and to each other. Seemingly, there are as many top- the application of neuroscientific knowledge to hu- down approaches to NE as philosophers in the man beings […] [whereas the latter studies] the field (e.g., Farah 20127; Gazzaniga 2005;8 Giord- impact of neuroscientific knowledge upon our un- ano n. d.;9 Moreno 2003;10 Safire 200711) but derstanding of ethics itself” (Levy 2007, p. 1). probably even more.12 Furthermore: This unsystematic versatility is disadvant- ageous for any attempt at a precise localization the ethics of neuroscience can be roughly of Churchland’s publication within the field be- subdivided into […] (1) the ethical issues cause it suggests that the aforementioned top- and considerations that should be raised in down approaches to NE are necessarily incom- the course of designing and executing plete or even inconsistent. Hence, their applica- neuroscientific studies and (2) evaluation tion can lead to unsatisfactory results—for ex- of the ethical and social impact that the ample, a localization of the publication that de- results of those studies might have, or pends more on a research agenda than on ought to have, on existing social, ethical, facts.13 The bottom-up approach to NE at- and legal structures. (Roskies 2002, p. 21) tempts to provide a solution to this problem.

7 Farah characterizes NE as “a broad range of ethical, legal, and social This top-down approach to NE emphasizes the issues raised by progress in neuroscience” (2012, p. 572). philosophical challenges posed by neuroscience 8 Gazzaniga understands NE as “the examination of how we want to deal with the social issues of disease, normality, mortality, lifestyle, (Racine 2008, p. 34), for example, for “philosoph- and the philosophy of living, informed by our understanding of un- ical notions such as free-will, self-control, personal derlying brain mechanisms” (2005, p. xv). 9 Giordano identifies NE with “(1) the study of neurological bases of identity, and intention” (Roskies 2002, p. 22). moral cognition, sense and action[,] (2) the field of study that ad- From a technology-driven perspective (Ra- dresses the moral issues that arise in and from neuroscientific re- cine 2008, p. 33), Wolpe identifies NE with “both search and the clinical practices and social effects/implications that evolve from these investigations[, and] (3) the reciprocal research and clinical applications of neurotechno- interaction(s) between neurological research/clinical practices and logy, as well as social and policy issues attendant other ethically relevant areas of biomedical sciences” (Giordano n.d.). 10 Moreno argues that NE “is in some ways old wine in a new bottle” to their use. […] [Thus, it is] a content field, (2003, p. 153). defined by the technologies it examines rather 11 Safire defines NE as “the examination of what is right and wrong, good and bad about the treatment of, perfection of, and welcome in- than any particular philosophical approach” vasion or worrisome manipulation of the human brain” (2007, p. 8). (Wolpe 2004, p. 1894). This top-down approach 12 Buniak et al. “provide an iterative, four-part document that affords to NE emphasizes the ethical challenges of using a repository of international papers, books, and chapters that ad- dress the field in overview, and present discussion(s) of more particu- neurotechnology (Racine 2008, p. 33), for ex- lar aspects and topics of neuroethics” (2014, p. 3).

3 A bottom-up approach to neuroethics philosophy (e.g., American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience, American Journal of Bioethics, The bottom-up approach to NE is a quantitat- Bioethics, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare ive approach (based on scientometric methods) Ethics, Consciousness and Cognition, Journal that, among other things, allows us to outline of Applied Philosophy, Journal of Medical Eth- the field from 1995 until 2012 through the de- ics, Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, velopment of subject categories or topic proto- Neuroethics, Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psycho- types.14 Although similar work has been done logy, Science and Engineering Ethics, Hastings before, for example, by Gooray & Ferguson Center Report, The Journal of Law, Medicine & (2013), Garnet et al. (2011), or Seixas & Basto Ethics, and Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics), (2008), no bottom-up approach to NE based on the humanities, and social sciences.18 On the such a comprehensive database as that of Hildt other hand, the bibliography is based on regular et al. (forthcoming) has yet been attempted.15 searches of both relevant citation (meta-)data- To be more precise, they use the Mainz NE bib- bases such as Web of Science,19 PubMed,20 and liography.16 Scopus,21 and relevant bibliographies such as the The Mainz bibliography (launched in Brainstorm22 newsletter of the Canadian Neuro- 2006) is an open-access online bibliography ethics and Mental Health Interest Group. The compiled and provided by the Mainz Research bibliography also incorporates irregular addi- Group on Neuroethics/Neurophilosophy.17 Cur- tions of relevant publications (mainly antholo- rently, the bibliography, as a multimodal com- gies, edited volumes, and monographs) as soon pilation of NE publications (e.g., anthologies, as the Research Group on Neuroethics/Neuro- edited volumes, journal articles, and mono- philosophy becomes aware of them. Regarding graphs), contains about 4095 entries produced the selection criteria for publications from the between 1949 and mid-2014. On the one hand, various sources, publications from neuroscience the bibliography is based on regular scans of or medicine are selected if they refer to the relevant journals from neuroscience and medi- philosophical, ethical, anthropological, or socio- cine (e.g., Cortex, Der Nervenarzt, EMBO Re- cultural impact of the presented results, ports, Journal of Neurology, Journal of the American Medical Association, Nature, Nature 18 The aforementioned selection of twenty-nine journals comprises those journals that had added at least twenty publications to the Mainz Neuroscience, Nature Reviews Neuroscience, NE bibliography before mid-2014. The number of publications ranges Neurocritical Care, NeuroImage, Neurology, from (at least) 352 publications (American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience), 298 publications (American Journal of Bioethics), 211 Neuropsychology Review, Psychopharmacology, publications (Neuroethics), 91 publications (Nature Reviews Neuros- Science, and Trends in Cognitive Sciences), cience), 68 publications (Der Nervenarzt), 61 publications (Nature Neuroscience), 58 publications (Journal of Medical Ethics), 57 pub- 13 For example, facts that are necessary for an adequate mapping of the lications (Journal of Neurology), 54 publications (Nature and Neuro- field may have been (un-)intentionally overlooked. logy), 46 publications (Bioethics), 40 publications (NeuroImage and 14 In Hildt et al. (forthcoming), the developed subject categories or Science and Engineering Ethics), 37 publications (Trends in Cognit- topic prototypes form the basis for further scientometric analysis of ive Sciences), 35 publications (Hastings Center Report), 31 publica- the data. For example, the subject categories or topic prototypes al- tions (Journal of the American Medical Association, Medicine, low us to examine the development and institutionalization of NE Health Care and Philosophy, and Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psycho- (e.g., temporal development, structure and disciplinary institutional- logy), 28 publications (Science), 26 publications (Cortex and EMBO ization, and reciprocal shaping of NE and related disciplines). Reports), 23 publications (Neurocritical Care and Neuropsychology 15 For example, Gooray & Ferguson’s (2013) database contains about Review), 22 publications (Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 205 entries dating from 2000 to 2012. The database is based on Journal of Applied Philosophy, and Psychopharmacology), 21 publica- books and articles from the following twelve journals: Neuroethics, tions (The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics) to 20 publications American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience, Nature Reviews Neur- (Consciousness and Cognition and Theoretical Medicine and Bioeth- oscience, Annual Review of Neuroscience, Behavioral and Brain Sci- ics). This selection of twenty-nine journals could be a fruitful start- ences, Molecular Psychiatry, Nature Neuroscience, Neuron, Trends in ing point for future scientometric research related to NE. Besides Neurosciences, Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, Annals of Neurology, this, the Mainz NE bibliography comprises journals that have added and Progress in Neurobiology. In contrast, Hildt et al.’s (forthcoming) less than twenty publications (e.g., Behavioral and Brain Sciences database contains about 2296 entries dating from 1995 to 2012. It is and Philosophical Psychology). based on books and articles from more than 700 journals. 19 http://www.webofknowledge.com 16 https://teamweb.uni- 20 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed mainz.de/fb05/Neuroethics/SitePages/Home.aspx 21 http://www.scopus.com 17 http://www.blogs.uni-mainz.de/fb05philosophieengl/further-institu- 22 http://www.ircm.qc.ca/LARECHERCHE/AXES/NEURO/NEURO- tions/research-group-on-neuroethics-and-neurophilosophy/ ETHIQUE/PAGES/GROUPE.ASPX?PFLG=1033&lan=1033

Boelsen, H. (2015). Applied Metascience of Neuroethics - A Commentary on Paul M. Churchland. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds). Open MIND: 6(C). Frankfurt am Main: MIND Group. doi: 10.15502/9783958570580 4 | 9 www.open-mind.net whereas publications from philosophy, the hu- assimilate it to (at least) one subject category manities, or social sciences are selected if they or topic prototype27 and, thereby, localize it refer to empirical results from neuroscience or within NE. medicine. Moreover, non-transdisciplinary pub- In the following, I apply the bottom-up lications are selected if the Research Group on approach to NE to Churchland’s publication Neuroethics/Neurophilosophy considers them to and present my case study results. I thereby at- be relevant to NE.23 tempt to achieve the first part of my epistemic Subsequently, Hildt et al. (forthcoming) goal, which is to localize Churchland’s publica- use a bibliometric analysis of the Mainz NE bib- tion within NE. liography from 1995 until 2012 to develop, among other things, fifteen subject categories or 4 Case study results topic prototypes on content-based criteria. Thereby, each subject category or topic proto- The keyword-based search of the abstract and type is defined by up to thirty-one keywords title of Churchland’s publication reveals that it that appear frequently in the abstracts and can be assimilated to the subject category or titles of the publications. These fifteen subject topic prototype Moral Theory, that is, a subject categories or topic prototypes are Addiction, category or topic prototype that comprises pub- Brain Death and Severe Disorders of Con- lications on the psychology and neurobiology of sciousness, Brain Stimulation, Enhancement, moral-decision making, publications on determ- Legal Studies, (Medical) Research and Medicine, inism, free-will, and the function of moral the- Molecular Neurobiology and Genetics, Moral ory in the neurosciences, and publications on Theory, Neuroimaging, Neuroscience and Soci- challenges to established interpretations of mor- ety, Neurosurgery, Philosophy of Mind and ally significant concepts such as autonomy, re- Consciousness, Psychiatric and Neurodegenerat- sponsibility, and human nature. ive Diseases and Disorders, Psychopharmaco- This subject category or topic prototype logy, and Social and Economic Neuroscience. has strong connections to the subject categories Each subject category or topic prototype repres- or topic prototypes Neuroimaging, Philosophy ents certain issues discussed in NE24 and, taken of Mind and Consciousness, and Social and together, they outline the field.25 Importantly, Economic Neuroscience, and weak connections Hildt et al. (forthcoming) also determine, to the subject categories or topic prototypes among other things, the connection strengths26 Addiction, Brain Death and Severe Disorders of between the subject categories or topic proto- Consciousness, Brain Stimulation, Enhance- types within NE. Due to the content-based de- ment, Legal Studies, (Medical) Research and velopment of the subject categories or topic pro- Medicine, Molecular Neurobiology and Genetics, totypes, a keyword-based search of the abstract Neuroscience and Society, Neurosurgery, Psy- and title of any publication in NE allows us to chiatric and Neurodegenerative Diseases and 23 For example, a publication in medicine on the effects of neuroleptics, Disorders, and Psychopharmacology. The strong antidepressants, stimulants, or tranquilizers is selected if it could of- connections can be explained by a high number fer a contribution to the interdisciplinary debate on psychopharma- cological cognitive enhancement. of shared publications, that is, a high number of 24 Combinations of the subject categories or topic prototypes are able publications that can be assimilated to both the to represent almost every issue discussed in NE. subject category or topic prototype Moral The- 25 Bottom-up approaches to NE attempt to provide maximally parsi- monious bottom-up descriptions of their target phenomenon (e.g., ory and the subject category or topic prototype NE as a dynamical publication state-space). If the top-down descrip- Neuroimaging, Philosophy of Mind and Con- tions of NE, provided by the top-down approaches to NE, are neither identical with nor reducible to the bottom-up descriptions of NE, sciousness, or Social and Economic Neuros- then, using a superficial analogy to Churchland’s eliminative materialism (1981), an interesting question is whether or not (and, if so, 27 A publication can be assimilated to a subject category or topic prototype which of) the top-down descriptions of NE can be eliminated. if its abstract and title contain (at least) one of the keywords that define 26 The connection strength between two subject categories or topic pro- the subject category or topic prototype. As such, less than ten percent of totypes depends upon the number of shared publications, that is, the the total publications could not be assimilated to a subject category or number of publications that can be assimilated to both subject cat- topic prototype. An interesting questions is whether or not (and, if so, egories or topic prototypes. how) those publications can still be regarded as belonging to NE.

Boelsen, H. (2015). Applied Metascience of Neuroethics - A Commentary on Paul M. Churchland. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds). Open MIND: 6(C). Frankfurt am Main: MIND Group. doi: 10.15502/9783958570580 5 | 9 www.open-mind.net cience. The weak connections can be explained the strong connections between the subject cat- by a low number of shared publications, that is, egory or topic prototype Moral Theory and the a low number of publications that can be assim- subject categories or topic prototypes ilated to both the subject category or topic pro- Neuroimaging, Philosophy of Mind and Con- totype Moral Theory and the subject category sciousness, and Social and Economic Neuros- or topic prototype Addiction, Brain Death and cience. The strong connections can be explained Severe Disorders of Consciousness, Brain Stim- by the high numbers of shared publications. ulation, Enhancement, Legal Studies, (Medical) The high numbers of shared publications can be Research and Medicine, Molecular Neurobiology explained by the high degrees of overlap of and Genetics, Neuroscience and Society, either content, methodology, or both.28 This, in Neurosurgery, Psychiatric and Neurodegenerat- turn, indicates high probabilities that Church- ive Diseases and Disorders, or Psychopharma- land’s publication will prove fruitful for research cology (Hildt et al. forthcoming). that can be assimilated to the aforementioned In the following, I analyze my results. I subject categories or topic prototypes. Con- thereby attempt to achieve the second part of versely, Churchland’s publication has low de- my epistemic goal, which is to reveal the degrees of relevance to research that can be assim- grees of relevance of Churchland’s publication ilated to the subject categories or topic proto- to neuroethical research; as well as my argu- types Addiction, Brain Death and Severe Dis- mentative goal, which is to demonstrate that orders of Consciousness, Brain Stimulation, applied metascience of NE can optimize NE it- Enhancement, Legal Studies, (Medical) Research self and, hence, improve our pursuit of moral and Medicine, Molecular Neurobiology and Ge- understanding. netics, Neuroscience and Society, Neurosurgery, Psychiatric and Neurodegenerative Diseases and 5 Analysis Disorders, or Psychopharmacology because of the weak connections between the subject cat- First of all, the degrees of relevance of publica- egory or topic prototype Moral Theory and the tions to neuroethical research are measured by aforementioned subject categories or topic pro- the connection strengths between the subject totypes. Here are some brief theoretical consid- categories or topic prototypes. The connection erations. strengths between subject categories or topic Churchland’s publication is highly relevant prototypes depend upon the numbers of shared to research that can be assimilated to the sub- publications. The numbers of shared publica- ject category or topic prototype Economic and tions can be explained by the degrees of overlap Social Neuroscience, suggesting that his idea of of content, methodology, or both. The degrees reconceiving moral decision-making in terms of of overlap of content, methodology, or both, in PDP could prove fruitful for neuroethical re- turn, indicate the probabilities that publications search that refers to the underlying physiology will prove fruitful for neuroethical research. In of economic or social decision-making. This ap- short, the degrees of relevance of publications to plication might show that moral, economic, and neuroethical research, as measured by the con- social decision-making share important proper- nection strengths between subject categories or ties but differ in others. This possible result topic prototypes, indicate the probabilities that could then be fed back into neuroethical re- publications will prove fruitful for neuroethical search. research. Churchland’s publication is also highly rel- Based on my results, Churchland’s public- evant to research that can be assimilated to the ation has high degrees of relevance to research subject category or topic prototype Neuroima- that can be assimilated to the subject categories 28 Accordingly, publications that can be assimilated to the subject or topic prototypes Moral Theory, Neuroima- category or topic prototype Moral Theory, Neuroimaging, Philo- ging, Philosophy of Mind and Consciousness, or sophy of Mind and Consciousness, or Social and Economic Neur- oscience are highly relevant to the subject of Churchland’s pub- Social and Economic Neuroscience because of lication.

Boelsen, H. (2015). Applied Metascience of Neuroethics - A Commentary on Paul M. Churchland. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds). Open MIND: 6(C). Frankfurt am Main: MIND Group. doi: 10.15502/9783958570580 6 | 9 www.open-mind.net ging, suggesting that his idea of reconceiving This feedback process, in turn, can optim- moral decision-making in terms of PDP could ize NE itself and, hence, improve our pursuit of prove fruitful for neuroethical research that moral understanding because it can help to refers to imaging techniques that visualize the “produce better ethical theories […] and contrib- brain, such as cranial computed tomography ute toward the great project of better under- (CCT), electroencephalography (EEG), mag- standing ourselves” (Levy 2011, p. 8). Appar- netic resonance imaging (MRI), functional mag- ently, a recurring pattern emerges: the bottom- netic resonance imaging (fMRI), and positron up approach to NE can be applied to neuroeth- emission tomography (PET) (Hildt 2012, p. 11). ical research, which, in turn, can led to such For example, it could be used to reconceive the results that can be fed back into it, which, in classic distinction between off-track and truth- turn, can optimize NE itself and, hence, im- tracking processes in genealogical debunking ar- prove our pursuit of moral understanding. guments29 that refer to fMRI research (e.g., Greene 2008 and Singer 2005). This application 6 Concluding remarks might show that the classic distinction is neuro- biologically implausible, which would mean that In this commentary, I applied the bottom-up arguments relying on this distinction are im- approach to NE to Churchland’s publication. I plausible as well. This possible result could then thereby attempted to localize the publication be fed back into neuroethical research. within NE and reveal its degrees of relevance to Moreover, the possible (yet unrecognized) neuroethical research, and to demonstrate that relevance of Churchland’s publication to re- applied metascience of NE can optimize NE it- search that can be assimilated to the subject self and, hence, improve our pursuit of moral categories or topic prototypes Addiction, Brain understanding. Death and Severe Disorders of Consciousness, Assuming that I have achieved the former, Brain Stimulation, Enhancement, Legal Studies, which was my epistemic goal, the first and more (Medical) Research and Medicine, Molecular specific take-home message is that potential fol- Neurobiology and Genetics, Neuroscience and low-up studies on Churchland’s publication Society, Neurosurgery, Psychiatric and Neurode- should consider my case study results and ana- generative Diseases and Disorders, and Psycho- lysis, that is, they should both bring together pharmacology could have been emphasized more research that can be assimilated to the subject strongly by including keywords in the abstract categories or topic prototypes Moral Theory, and title that define the aforementioned subject Neuroimaging, Philosophy of Mind and Con- categories or topic prototypes, which, in turn, sciousness, and Social and Economic Neuros- could have increased the connection strengths cience, and build bridges to research that can between those subject categories or topic proto- be assimilated to the subject categories or topic types and the subject category or topic proto- prototypes Addiction, Brain Death and Severe type Moral Theory. A possible outcome of this Disorders of Consciousness, Brain Stimulation, could have been the revelation of a systematic Enhancement, Legal Studies, (Medical) Research overlap of content, methodology, or both that and Medicine, Molecular Neurobiology and Ge- has been neglected so far. And this possible res- netics, Neuroscience and Society, Neurosurgery, ult could then have been fed back into neuro- Psychiatric and Neurodegenerative Diseases and ethical research.30 Disorders, and Psychopharmacology. Assuming that I have achieved the latter, which was my 29 According to Kahane, the general form of a genealogical debunking argument is the following: S’s belief that p is explained by x. But, x is an off- argumentative goal, the more general take-home track process, that is, not a truth-tracking process, with respect to p. message is that future neuroethical research Therefore, S’s belief that p is unjustified (Kahane 2011, p. 106). 30 Of course, this theoretical consideration is not meant to be a serious should be more careful to take applied metas- criticism of Churchland’s publication, because the bottom-up ap- cience of NE into account because it can optim- proach to NE was not available to him at the time of writing. It ize NE itself and, hence, improve our pursuit of rather shows that applied metascience of NE can help us discover new pathways and directions for future neuroethical research. moral understanding.

In the case of the bottom-up approach to References NE, this can be done at different stages of research. First, while seeking inspiration for re- Buniak, L., Darragh, M. & Giordano, J. (2014). A four- search, researchers and students can bypass part working bibliography of neuroethics: part 1: Over- well-trodden paths in NE and identify (as yet) view and reviews – defining and describing the field unorthodox ones from the very beginning. and its practices. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities Second, while pursuing these (or already well- in Medicine, 9 (9), 1-14. 10.1186/1747-5341-9-9 trodden) paths, scholars can optimize the effi- Churchland, P. M. (1981). Eliminative materialism and ciency of their own research. Third, while pre- the propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy, 78 paring their research for publication, they can (2), 67-90. 10.2307/2025900 prepare abstracts and titles in such a manner as (2012). Plato’s camera: How the physical brain to optimally reflect the publications’ (real or in- captures a landscape of abstract universals. Cambridge, tended) degrees of relevance to specific subject MA: MIT Press. categories or topic prototypes. Fourth and fi- (2015). Rules: The basis of morality...? In T. Met- nally, when taking it into account, they shape zinger & J. M. Windt (Eds.) Open MIND. Frankfurt a. NE in such a way that it provides input for M., GER: MIND Group. more fine-grained follow-up models in the Farah, M. (2012). Neuroethics: The ethical, legal, and so- metascience of NE. cietal impact of neuroscience. Annual Review of Psy- If this general idea is on the right track, chology, 63 (1), 571-591. then applied metascience of NE is complement- 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100438 ary to (and perhaps even extends) Churchland’s Garnet, A., Whiteley, L., Piwowar, H., Rasmussen, E. & argument, only on a different level: “knowing Illes, J. (2011). Neuroethics and fMRI: Mapping a how the brain works to generate and constantly fledgling relationship. PLoS ONE, 6 (4), e18537. improve our moral understanding will not obvi- 10.1371/journal.pone.0018537 ate the need to keep it working towards that Gazzaniga, M. (2005). The ethical brain. New York, NY: worthy end” (Churchland this collection, p. 13; Dana Press. emphasis omitted), just as knowing how to op- Giordano, J. (2014). Neuroethics. At the intersection of timize NE will not do this either, though both neuroscience, morality, and society, Retrieved Septem- “may help us to improve our pursuit thereof” ber 11, 2014, from http://www.neurobioethics.org (Churchland this collection, p. 13). Only time Gooray, E. & Ferguson, C. (2013). Neuroethics as a field: will tell. How much has it grown, about what, and by whom? Unpublished manuscript, Retrieved July 15, 2014, from http://www.neuroethicssociety.org/survey-neuroethics- as-a-field Greene, J. (2008). The secret joke of Kant’s soul. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong (Ed.) Moral psychology: The neuroscience of morality: Emotion, brain disorders, and development (pp. 35-79). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Hildt, E. (2012). Neuroethik. München, GER: Reinhardt. Hildt, E., Leefmann, J. & Levallois, C. (forthcoming). A bottom-up analysis of “neuroethics”. Kahane, G. (2011). Evolutionary debunking arguments. Noûs, 45 (1), 103-125. 10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00770.x Levy, N. (2007). Neuroethics: Challenges for the 21st century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (2011). Neuroethics: A new way of doing ethics. American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience, 2 (2), 3-9. 10.1080/21507740.2011.557683

Marcus, S. (Ed.) (2002). Neuroethics: Mapping the field. New York, NY: Dana Press. Metzinger, T. (2012). Zehn Jahre Neuroethik des pharmazeutischen kognitiven Enhancements: Aktuelle Probleme und Handlungsrichtlinien für die Praxis. Fortschritte der Neurologie und Psychiatrie, 80 (1), 36- 43. 10.1055/s-0031-1282051 Moreno, J. (2003). Neuroethics: An agenda for neuroscience and society. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4 (2), 149-153. 10.1038/nrn1031 Racine, E. (2008). Pragmatic neuroethics: Improving treatment and understanding of the mind-brain. Cam- bridge, MA: MIT Press. Racine, E. & Illes, J. (2008). Neuroethics. In P. Singer & A. Viens (Eds.) Cambridge textbook of bioethics (pp. 495-503). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Roskies, A. (2002). Neuroethics for the new millenium. Neuron, 35 (1), 21-23. 10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00763-8 Safire, W. (2007). Visions for a new field of “neuroethics”. In W. Glannon (Ed.) Defining right and wrong in brain science: essential readings in neuroethics (pp. 7- 11). New York, NY: Dana Press. Seixas, D. & Basto, M. (2008). Ethics in fMRI studies. A review of the EMBASE and MEDLINE literature. Clinical Neuroradiology, 18 (2), 79-87. 10.1007/s00062- 008-8009-5 Singer, P. (2005). Ethics and intuitions. The Journal of Ethics, 9 (3-4), 331-352. 10.1007/s10892-005-3508-y Walter, H. (2013). Neurophilosophie und Philosophie der Neurowissenschaft. In A. Stephan & S. Walter (Eds.) Handbuch Kognitionswissenschaft (pp. 133-138). Stut- tgart, GER: Metzler. Wolpe, P. (2004). Neuroethics. Encyclopedia of bioethics. 3rd ed. Vol. 4 (pp. 1894-1898). New York, NY: Macmil- lan Reference.