))
A Masterclass in Neuroethics with Dr. Nada Gligorov
Manage episode 307879494 series 2956476
Content provided by National Academy of Neuropsychology Foundation. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by National Academy of Neuropsychology Foundation or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Dr. Nada Gligorov, the Director of Graduate Studies and Associate Professor at the Alden March Bioethics Institute at Albany Medical College, joins Peter Stavinoha on the podcast today to talk about neuroethics. Prior to joining the Bioethics Institute, she was Associate Professor of Medical Education at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Dr. Gligorov has published in leading journals in bioethics and philosophy including the Hastings Center Report, the American Journal of Bioethics, Neuroscience, Neuroethics, and the Monist. She has served as a member of the American Philosophical Association's Committee on philosophy and medicine from 2018 to 2020, and she's currently the chair of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, Neuroethics Affinity Group. She is also the author of a book titled Neuroethics and the Scientific Revision of Common Sense which she discusses with Peter here today.
Dr. Gligorov kicks off the episode by describing what neuroethics is and gives us an overview of her book Neuroethics and the Scientific Revision of Common Sense. She defines common sense and talks about neuroimaging and the different aspects of it, and then sheds more light on neuro privacy, mental privacy, the safeguards to mental privacy, and additional issues that could arise from doing neuroscience research. She also discusses the concept of freewill, the friction between neuroscience and freewill, her thoughts on the neuroethical issues related to impairments or alterations of consciousness and making decisions for others at the end of life. The implications of neurodegenerative or neurologic injuries, brain injuries, dementia, that result in a loss of cognitive capacity, and those kinds of conditions when cognitive capacity for decision making has been impaired are also covered, and our guest delves further into neurologic compromise and cognitive enhancement She finishes up by sharing her understanding of parents making decisions on behalf of their kids and by exploring pain as a mental state, giving some insight into the cognitive influence of pain through the placebo and nocebo effects. A true expert in her field, Dr. Nada Gligorov possesses a great deal of wisdom and knowledge which she generously shares with listeners in today’s thought provoking conversation.
Episode Highlights:
● Description of Neuroethics
● Overview of Neuroethics and the Scientific Revision of Common Sense
● Common Sense
● Neuroimaging
● Neuro and mental privacy
● Safeguards to mental privacy
● Issues arising from neuroscience research such as incidental findings
● The concept of free will
● Neuroscience vs. freewill
● Making decisions for others at the end of life
● Implications of neurodegenerative or neurologic injuries
● Neurologic compromise, cognitive enhancement and the implications
● Drawing the line between enhancement and treatment
● The placebo and nocebo effects as they relate to pain
Quotes:
“Common sense morality is an everyday way in which we talk about other people, meaning that the way in which we explain and predict our own behavior related to morality, and the way in which we explain and predict other people's behavior.”
“It’s through the popularization of neuroscience and the fact that we hear about neuroscience research in the popular media and from other sources as well that we have started to incorporate some of those scientific facts into our moral concepts, and by using those scientifically influenced moral concepts, we are also explaining and predicting human behavior in everyday life based on this scientific influence.”
“As an individual might have diminished states of consciousness, we tend to also think of them as having diminished freewill or even sometimes diminished cognition. But I think that it's actually not necessary to think of consciousness as being the primary ingredient there. It's not just that people are losing or have diminished states of consciousness; it's much more that they're losing some of their other capabilities.”
“When you're losing your cognition, you're losing aspects of your memory; you are losing your ability to appreciate information and apply it to yourself. You're less able to really hold a variety of different alternatives in your mind and use those to make decisions.”
“The ethical use of medicine should correspond with the treatment of disease or the prevention of disability, but it shouldn't be used to enhance normal human abilities or to promote certain desirable traits that we would like to achieve but we don't have.”
“And even just the concept of normal can be related a lot to our cultural and other ideas about what constitutes normal functioning. So it can be actually very hard to make the distinction between cognitive enhancers and the medical use of medicine.”
“Parents are, in essence, inherently surrogates. They're making decisions in a way that can either promote or not the overall well-being of their kids and even affect their future.”
“One can say that pain is a biological and psychological process, meaning that there are biological underpinnings of the sensation of pain and also psychological.”
“If people have positive treatment expectations, they're much more likely to experience relief from their pain if they believe that the medicine will help them.”
“If somebody tells you that you're likely to experience a high intensity pain, that might actually cause the individual to experience high intensity pain.”
Links:
National Academy of Neuropsychology Foundation website
18 episodes
Share
