This Research Topic is part of the article collection series,
Ethical, social, and legal implications of neural enhancement with noninvasive brain stimulationThe field of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) and its attendant neuroethics has matured somewhat in recent years, accompanied by expanded inquiry into neuromodulatory efficacy, limitations, and true potential to deliver on the early hype. NIBS technologies may have the capacity to increase human cognitive abilities in either transient or potentially enduring ways, not only for persons who suffer from neurologic and psychiatric disorders that impair their mental acuity but also for individuals who wish to augment their intellectual capabilities beyond their normal limits. Recently inaugurated research programs are examining the potential application of NIBS to augment human performance in increasingly complex contexts, such as to augment human-machine teaming in cyberspace and military operations. Investments in developing closed-loop applications of non-invasive brain stimulation promise to increase the sophistication of brain-machine interfaces and may help to overcome NIBS efficacy limitations related to interindividual response variability. On the simpler end of the application continuum, the fact that neuromodulation technologies like transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are inexpensive to build, seemingly safe, and technically straightforward to operate continues to motivate the activity community of “do-it-yourself” brain stimulators. The individuals combine their shared self-experimentation experiences with close reading of the scientific literature to guide their quest to create smarter, better selves. All of these trends sustain public attention, both from an enthusiastic and decidedly optimistic media as well as from commercial entities that are motivated to make neural enhancement devices both commonplace and profitable.
As attractive as neural enhancement with brain stimulation may seem, its promise remains tempered by the many potential ethical, social, and legal challenges that accompany it. Some of these questions have become more complex as the applied science evolves. As both the limitations and potential applications come into focus, the need to continue (and in some cases evolve) neuroethical inquiry also becomes clear. In order to create a sensible framework for thinking about how to engage the range of personal and societal problems that may accompany widespread adoption of brain stimulation, certain fundamental questions must be addressed, many of which would be most sensibly addressed by experts such as neuroscientists, neuroethicists, and neuromodulation device manufacturers.
In this second edition of the article collection, we will assemble a team of leaders in these and other fields to provide a comprehensive, rigorous, and balanced approach to engaging the current promises, perils, and pitfalls of neural enhancement with non-invasive brain stimulation. Given recent developments in applying tDCS as an enhancement approach, this will be the principal but not sole technical focus of this Research Topic. Authors should address central questions, such as the safety and efficacy of cognitive enhancement with brain stimulation. Interestingly, our discussion of safety must include not only the risk of physical injury but also the potential for inadvertent cognitive effects both for individuals and societies. Increased attention will be paid to issues of psychological safety and the relational consequences of neuroaugmentation in various sociocultural contexts.
Epistemological issues will be revisited regarding what can and cannot be gleaned about the capacity for neuromodulation technologies to enhance normal abilities based on current cognitive neuroscience experiments and clinical studies of patients. In addition to pondering whether there is an ethically meaningful difference between treatment and enhancement when it comes to cognition, we will consider ethical questions concerning the potential of BMI-mediated applications of non-invasive brain stimulation to extend human capabilities beyond natural human functions.
Finally, we will discuss how a rational framework for regulating cognitive enhancement and behavioral augmentation might look, and what the challenges are in finding an appropriate balance between public safety and respect for autonomy with regard to cosmetic brain stimulation.
