Ethical considerations of military-funded neuroscience

The United States military and intelligence communities have developed a close relationship with the scientific establishment. In particular, they fund and utilize an array of neuroscience applications, generating profound ethical issues.

Neuroscience offers possibilities for cutting edge, deployable solutions for the needs of national security and defence, but are, or at least should be, tempered by questions of scientific validity, consequential ethical considerations, and concern for the relationship between science and security. This debate is explored in an essay by Jonathan D Moreno and Michael N Tennison, published March 20 in the online, open-access journal .

Rapid advances in basic neuroscience over the last decade facilitate many "dual use" applications; those of both military and civilian interest. who receive military funding may not fully appreciate the potentially lethal implications of their work. This paper seeks to cultivate a culture of dual use awareness, in both the scientific community and the general public.

For example, brain-computer interfaces, which have already been used to make monkeys control walking robots remotely, could enable humans to operate military devices while sheltered from the reality of combat. Also, research suggests that neuromodulation technologies, such as transcranial , could be used to enhance or suppress certain neurological capacities of soldiers on the battlefield. In addition, neuroscientific deception detection, while putatively performing better than traditional 'lie-detector' polygraphs, raises questions of reliability and privacy.

The authors suggest that issues such as these "need to be addressed to ensure the pragmatic synthesis of ethical accountability and national security". Just as many nuclear scientists of the time discussed the issues of using of atomic weapons, contributing to the test ban treaties of the 1960s, neuroscientists of today could engage the ethical, legal, and social implications of the militarization of their work.

More information: Tennison MN, Moreno JD (2012) Neuroscience, Ethics, and National Security: The State of the Art. PLoS Biol 10(3): e1001289. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001289

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Clarity needed on use of chemical weapons, says UK report

Feb 07, 2012

A report examining the role of neuroscience research in military and civilian law enforcement contexts, led by a Queen Mary, University of London academic, has called on the government to provide clarity on the use of chemical ...

What do you have in mind? Ethical questions in neuroscience

Nov 14, 2008

(PhysOrg.com) -- New methods for examining and influencing brain activity have led to better treatments for disabling neurological and psychiatric diseases, but they also pose ethical questions about their use inside and ...

Recommended for you

US must respond to global health outbreaks, say bioethicists

10 hours ago

Last summer, West Africa fell into the grip of a deadly outbreak of Ebola that has thus far taken the lives of more than 9,500 people. The fear swept up by the epidemic quickly jumped across the Atlantic and landed in the ...

Uganda on defensive over medical 'brain drain' uproar

Mar 03, 2015

Uganda's government on Tuesday hit back at mounting criticism of plans to 'export' over 200 health workers to the Caribbean, insisting it was only seeking to regulate an existing labour market and prevent abuses.

Seth Mnookin on vaccination and public health

Mar 02, 2015

Seth Mnookin, an assistant professor of science writing and associate director of MIT's Graduate Program in Science Writing, is the author of "The Panic Virus: The True Story Behind the Vaccine-Autism Controversy" ...

User comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.