Personality and Authenticity in Light of the Memory-Modifying Potential of Optogenetics

Ethical Issues in Memory Modification Technology: A Scoping Review

Memory modification technology (MMT) refers to the use of neurotechnologies to intervene in memories. Many scholars have reflected on the ethical issues in MMT, but a comprehensive review of this topic has not been seen. This article presents the first scoping review study of ethical issues in MMT using a bibliometric and systematic approach. After thorough examination, 133 records of key literature are included in this scoping review. Six core ethical themes are extracted: (1) self, identity, and authenticity; (2) autonomy and informed consent; (3) welfare and happiness; (4) safety and risks; (5) responsibility and obligation; (6) social and legal justice. More detailed analyses are conducted on the moral stances and reasons held by different scholars concerning these ethical themes. As can be seen, current debates exhibit certain shortcomings, including ambiguous ethical concepts and a restricted scope of analysis. Therefore, we call for deeper reflections on the philosophical foundations, more precise definitions of ethical terms, and more comprehensive examinations of neurotechnological applications, in order to better address the ethical challenges in the future.

Neuromodulation and memory: exploring ethical ramifications in memory modification treatment via implantable neurotechnologies

Invasive implantable neurotechnologies capable of simultaneously altering and recording neural activity are no longer the exclusive province of science fiction but a looming reality that will revolutionize medical practice. These advancements, particularly in their memory-altering capabilities, herald a vast array of opportunities for addressing the complex landscape of neurodegenerative and psychiatric conditions linked to memory impairments. However, the panoply of ethical implications arising from such a novel neurotechnology remains relatively unexplored by the neuroethics literature. This study examines and contrasts the potential ethical implications of memory modification treatment via implantable neurotechnologies. The study contends that undesired side effects resulting from memory modulation can lead to significant identity harms, disrupting the coherence of self-narratives and impinging on our authenticity. To evince the practical impact of this moral argument, the study conducts a practical ethical assessment of how employing implantable neurotechnologies to modulate memory may jeopardize (i) our moral responsiveness to events and core system of values and (ii) the emotional component associated with the altered memory. From a first-person standpoint, changes to the way we reasonably feel and react to past events and future intentions may be deemed ethically problematic as these profound changes can yield significant moral disruptions and negatively impact our personal lives and interpersonal relationships. In addition, the study discusses further ethical conundrums from a third-person perspective as these disruptions can inhibit social activism against structural injustices, thereby hindering societal progress. Thus, taking into account this societal dimension is paramount when evaluating the ethical permissibility of memory modification procedures.

Ethics and regulation of neuronal optogenetics in the European Union

Neuronal optogenetics is a technique to control the activity of neurons with light. This is achieved by artificial expression of light-sensitive ion channels in the target cells. By optogenetic methods, cells that are naturally light-insensitive can be made photosensitive and addressable by illumination and precisely controllable in time and space. So far, optogenetics has primarily been a basic research tool to better understand the brain. However, initial studies are already investigating the possibility of using optogenetics in humans for future therapeutic approaches for neuronal based diseases such as Parkinson's disease, epilepsy, or to promote stroke recovery. In addition, optogenetic methods have already been successfully applied to a human in an experimental setting. Neuronal optogenetics also raises ethical and legal issues, e.g., in relation to, animal experiments, and its application in humans. Additional ethical and legal questions may arise when optogenetic methods are investigated on cerebral organoids. Thus, for the successful translation of optogenetics from basic research to medical practice, the ethical and legal questions of this technology must also be answered, because open ethical and legal questions can hamper the translation. The paper provides an overview of the ethical and legal issues raised by neuronal optogenetics. In addition, considering the technical prerequisites for translation, the paper shows consistent approaches to address these open questions. The paper also aims to support the interdisciplinary dialogue between scientists and physicians on the one hand, and ethicists and lawyers on the other, to enable an interdisciplinary coordinated realization of neuronal optogenetics.

The Ethics of Memory Modification: Personal Narratives, Relational Selves and Autonomy

For nearly two decades, ethicists have expressed concerns that the further development and use of memory modification technologies (MMTs)—techniques allowing to intentionally and selectively alter memories—may threaten the very foundations of who we are, our personal identity, and thus pose a threat to our well-being, or even undermine our “humaneness.” This paper examines the potential ramifications of memory-modifying interventions such as changing the valence of targeted memories and selective deactivation of a particular memory as these interventions appear to be at the same time potentially both most promising clinically as well as menacing to identity. However, unlike previous works discussing the potential consequences of MMTs, this article analyzes them in the context of the narrative relational approach to personal identity and potential issues related to autonomy. I argue that such a perspective brings to light the ethical aspects and moral issues arising from the use of MMTs that have been hidden from previously adopted approaches. In particular, this perspective demonstrates how important the social context in which an individual lives is for the ethical evaluation of a given memory-modifying intervention. I conclude by suggesting that undertaking memory modifications without taking into account the social dimension of a person’s life creates the risk that she will not be able to meet one of the basic human needs—the autonomous construction and maintenance of personal identity. Based on this conclusion, I offer some reflections on the permissibility and advisability of MMTs and what these considerations suggest for the future.

The way forward for neuroethics in Japan: A review of five topics surrounding present challenges

Neuroethics is the study of how neuroscience impacts humans and society. About 15 years have passed since neuroethics was introduced to Japan, yet the field of neuroethics still seeks developed methodologies and an established academic identity. In light of progress in neuroscience and neurotechnology, the challenges for Japanese neuroethics in the 2020s can be categorized into five topics. (1) The need for further research into the importance of informed consent in psychiatric research and the promotion of public-patient engagement. (2) The need for a framework that constructs a global environment for neuroscience research that utilizes reliable samples and data. (3) The need for ethical support within a Japanese context regarding the construction of brain banks and the research surrounding their use. It is also important to reconsider the moral value of the human neural system and make comparisons with non-human primates. (4) An urgent need to study neuromodulation technologies that intervene in emotions. (5) The need to reconsider neuroscience and neurotechnology from social points of view. Rules for neuroenhancements and do-it-yourself neurotechnologies are urgently needed, while from a broader perspective, it is essential to study the points of contact between neuroscience and public health.

Memory Modulation Via Non-invasive Brain Stimulation: Status, Perspectives, and Ethical Issues

While research to improve memory or counter decay caused by neurodegenerative diseases has a fairly long history, scientific attempts to erase memories are very recent. The use of non-invasive brain stimulation for memory modulation represents a new and promising application for the treatment of certain disorders [such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)]. However, numerous ethical issues are related to memory intervention. In particular, the possibility of using forms of non-invasive brain stimulation requires to distinguish treatment interventions from the enhancement of the healthy. Furthermore, a range of important societal and legal concerns arise when manipulating memories. In this short contribution, we address some of the most significant ethical, social, and legal implications surrounding the application of memory-modulation techniques and offer a series of reflections and considerations, which we hope can be of use to guide -and perhaps regulate- their potential, future implementation in society.

Restoring vision using optogenetics without being blind to the risks

Retinit is pigmentosa is an incurable degenerative disease that causes loss of light-sensitive cells in the retina and leads to severe vision impairment. The development of optogenetics has created great hype around its potential to treat retinitis pigmentosa by the introduction of light-sensitive proteins into other neural cells in the retina. The first-in-human studies of optogenetic treatment for this disease have recently been reported (NCT02556736 and NCT03326336). The treatment involves irreversible gene therapy and requires access to specially designed goggles to deliver light to the treated eye. These highly innovative and high-profile clinical trials raise numerous ethical issues that must be addressed during the early phases of research and clinical testing to ensure trial participants are treated fairly and can provide appropriate informed consent.

Neural Safeguards against Global Impacts of Memory Modification on Identity: Ethical and Practical Considerations

Zawadzki and Adamczyk question whether removal of painful memories that anchor one’s narrative identity might leave behind a “free-floating” self plagued by feelings of inauthenticity. We argue that this scenario is unlikely, based on evidence that suggests our neural systems – especially those critical to human functioning1 – are naturally protected against minor, localized disruptions due to their synergistic distribution and redundancy2. For the same reason that artificial deep neural networks are increasingly designed to incorporate computational redundancy (especially those with safety-critical applications, such as self-driving cars), our own neural networks contain a degree of “cognitive reserve”3 to help mitigate against total system failure4,5 by drawing upon supplementary neural networks and forming new and more efficient connections (neuroplasticity) to compensate for disruptions.6 Neural representations of identity, a construct which evolutionary psychologists and behavioral ecologists argue is critical for survival at the individual, group and species levels7, are likely to incorporate such redundancy as a safeguard. The distribution of memory components across different brain regions supports the notion of cognitive reserve in the case of narrative identity. This arrangement complicates the capacity of optogenetic interventions to effectively erase complex autobiographical memories. Even if it were possible, we argue that disruptions to one’s identity and values are not necessarily ethically problematic, and must be viewed within the context of a risk-benefit ratio in which autonomously choosing to modify one’s debilitating or pathology-causing memories may confer benefits that outweigh potential challenges of identity reconstruction and (temporary) feelings of inauthenticity.