The question of what makes someone the same person through time and change has long been a preoccupation of philosophers. In recent years, the question of what makes ordinary or lay people judge that someone is—or isn’t—the same person has caught the interest of experimental psychologists. These latter, empirically oriented researchers have sought to understand the cognitive processes and eliciting factors that shape ordinary people’s judgments about personal identity and the self. Still more recently, practitioners within an emerging discipline, experimental (...) philosophical bioethics or “bioxphi”—the focus of this chapter—have adopted a similar aim and employed similar methodologies, but with two distinctive features: (a) a special concern for enhanced ecological validity in the examples and populations studied; and (b) an interest in contributing to substantive normative debates within the wider field of bioethics. Our aim in this chapter is to sample illustrative work on personal identity in bioxphi, explore how it relates to studies in psychology covering similar terrain, and draw out the implications of this work for matters of bioethical concern. In pursuing these issues, we highlight recent work in bioxphi that includes the perceived validity of advance directives following neurodegeneration, the right of psychologically altered study participants to withdraw from research, how drug addiction may cause one to be regarded by others as “a completely different person,” the effect of deep-brain stimulation on perceptions of the self, and the potential influence of moral enhancement interventions on intuitive impressions of a person’s character. (shrink)

The present article analyzes and outlines significant changes in ideas about the object of scientific knowledge in modern science. Special attention is paid to the transition to the paradigm of complexity, within which the object of scientific knowledge acquires a complex systemic character and remains in the same complex connections with systems of different levels. It is marked that such changes entail a number of methodological requirements, which are especially clearly manifested in modern theories of bioethics and its real practices. (...) A special role in this case is assigned to issues of transdisciplinary approach, complementary methodology, and values of the subject of bioethical cognition. The prospects for further research are related to the possibilities of deepening the methodology of the paradigm of complexity based on the application of a transdisciplinary approach. (shrink)