Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Justifying a Capability Approach to Brain Computer Interface.Andrew Ko & Nancy S. Jecker - 2023 - Philosophy and Technology 36 (1):1-6.
    Previously, we introduced a capability approach to assess the responsible use of brain-computer interface. In this commentary, we say more about the ethical basis of our capability view and respond to three objections. The first objection holds that by stressing that capability lists are provisional and subject to change, we threaten the persistence of human dignity, which is tied to capabilities. The second objection states that we conflate capabilities and abilities. The third objection claims that the goal of using neuroenhancements (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Abilities, Capabilities, and Brain-Computer Interfaces: a Response to Jecker and Ko.Matthew S. Lindia - 2022 - Philosophy and Technology 36 (1):1-6.
    In a recent article, Jecker and Ko propose that a capabilities approach can be useful as an ethical framework for evaluating the use of BCI applications. Jecker and Ko defend this application, in part, because a capabilities list is not necessarily unchanging, but can account for rapid enhancements in human abilities. In this commentary, I argue that, though the capabilities approach is provisional, its primary relevance for BCI emerges from the ways in which capabilities remain constant amidst changing human abilities.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Are Neurorights Global?Nancy S. Jecker & Andrew Ko - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 14 (4):369-371.
    Neurorights were first articulated in response to perceived threats from advances in neurotechnology and artificial intelligence (AI). They purport to protect people’s cognitive capabilities agains...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark