The Negative Effects of Neurointerventions: Confusing Constitution and Causation

American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 9 (3):162-164 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Birks and Buyx (2018) claim that, at least in the foreseeable future, nonconsensual neurointerventions will almost certainly suppress some valuable mental states and will thereby impose an objectionable harm to mental integrity—a harm that it is pro tanto wrong to impose. Of course, incarceration also interferes with valuable mental states, so might seem to be objectionable in the same way. However, Birks and Buyx block this result by maintaining that the negative mental effects of incarceration are merely foreseen, whereas those of neurointerventions are intended. We dispute Birks and Buyx’s characterization of the descriptive difference between these effects. In both cases, the negative effects are caused, not constituted, by the act in question.

Author Profiles

Thomas Douglas
University of Oxford
Hazem Zohny
University of Otago

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-09-22

Downloads
419 (#36,770)

6 months
106 (#31,397)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?