1. ["Target Article"] Canli, Turhan, et al. "Neuroethics and National Security." American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (May 2007): 3-13.
"We believe neuroscience applications might be useful to national security, but we are concerned about the possibility that they may be deployed prematurely and without sufficient attention to the ethical, legal, and social issues they raise."
2. Resnik, David B. "Neuroethics, National Security, and Secrecy." American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (May 2007): 14-16.
Handling the "dual use dilemma" in questions involving publication of biomedical research requires that editors and others "carefully assess and weigh the benefits and risks of public dissemination.... To make well-informed decisions, it is important to solicit advice from experts in the relevant area of science, but also experts in many other areas.... Decision makers may also require information from law enforcement, military, and intelligence authorities."
3. Justo, Luis, and Fabiana Erazun. "Neuroethics and Human Rights." American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (May 2007): 16-18.
4. Lunstroth, John, and Jan Goldman. "Ethical Intelligence from Neuroscience: Is It Possible?" American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (May 2007): 18-20.
The authors "merge three institutions into the term national security [italics in original], each of which is subject to different ethical and legal constraints and each of which has unique intelligence needs: the intelligence community, law enforcement, and the military. To understand the role of intelligence in support of national security and the norms required to conduct such work, it is important to differentiate between interviews, de-briefs, and interrogations in support of these objectives and to differentiate between the somewhat overlapping goals of the intelligence community to extract enough information to take action and conduct analysis, of the military related to armed conflict, and of law enforcement to obtain evidence for use in a trial."
5. Morris, Stephen G. "Neuroscience and the Free Will Conundrum." American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (May 2007): 20-22.
6. Rosenberg, Leah, and Eric Gehrie. "Against the Use of Medical Technologies for Military or National Security Interests." American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (May 2007): 22-24.
7. Alpert, Sheri. "Total Information Awareness -- Forgotten But Not Gone: Lessons for Neuroethics." American Journal of Bioethics 7, no. 5 (2007): 24-26.
DARPA's Total Information Awareness (TIA) did not really disappear when Congress cancelled its funding. "[M]any of the projects that comprised TIA were moved" to such agencies as NSA's Advanced Research and Development Activity. "In other words, the programs not only survived the attempt to eliminate them by Congress, but worse, they were transferred to the 'black' (classified) budget, where they continue beyond public scrutiny." This precedent is a cause for concern.
Return to Overviews/Ethics