Titlebook: Neuroethics and the Scientific Revision of Common Sense; Nada Gligorov Book 2016 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. Dordrecht 2016 Neuro

夾死提手勢(shì)

邪惡的你

ast, they are now deployed as wireless extensions to computer networks. The increase of the datarates from 2 Mbps up to 11 Mbps for roughly a constant price has played a major role in this breakthrough. As a consequence, an even greater success can be envisioned for the more recent OFDM-based WLAN s

Migratory

Introduction,scribed as resulting from the clash between the scientific perspective on concepts such as free will, personal identity, consciousness, etc., and the putatively commonsense conceptions of those terms. The assumption that undergirds the framing of the conflict between these two approaches is that adv

上坡

Rethinking Commonsense Conceptual Frameworks,ty. These predictions rely on a putative clash between commonsense morality and neuroscientific discoveries. In this chapter, I argue that commonsense morality is an empirically evaluable theory, which can be circumscribed in the same way as commonsense psychology—using Lewis’s method of collecting

針葉

政府

Cognitive Enhancement and Personal Identity,itive enhancement, and moral enhancement. In this chapter, I focus on the argument that cognitive enhancement using pharmaceutical means could cause disruptive changes in personal identity. I distinguish between numerical and narrative identity. I argue that cognitive enhancement would have no effec

施魔法

先鋒派

含糊其辭

Objectifying Pain, this chapter, I distinguish among the various ways in which pain is considered to be a subjective phenomenon, including introspectability, privacy, and incorrigibility. I argue that introspectability and privacy are features that could be shared by states both mental and physical. The kind of subje

BRIEF

Identifying Death,not only permanently unconscious, but lack brain stem reflexes and the endogenous drive to breathe, indicating that most of their brain has ceased to function. Although legally recognized in many countries as a criterion for death, brain death has not been universally accepted by bioethicists, by th