Neuroethics and the problem of other minds: Implications of neuroscience for the moral status of brain-damaged patients and nonhuman animals [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Neuroethics 1 (1):9-18 (2008)
Our ethical obligations to another being depend at least in part on that being’s capacity for a mental life. Our usual approach to inferring the mental state of another is to reason by analogy: If another being behaves as I do in a circumstance that engenders a certain mental state in me, I conclude that it has engendered the same mental state in him or her. Unfortunately, as philosophers have long noted, this analogy is fallible because behavior and mental states are only contingently related. If the other person is acting, for example, we could draw the wrong conclusion about his or her mental state. In this article I consider another type of analogy that can be drawn between oneself and another to infer the mental state of the other, substituting brain activity for behavior. According to most current views of the mind–body problem, mental states and brain states are non-contingently related, and hence inferences drawn with the new analogy are not susceptible to the alternative interpretations that plague the behavioral analogy. The implications of this approach are explored in two cases for which behavior is particularly unhelpful as a guide to mental status: severely brain–damaged patients who are incapable of intentional communicative behavior, and nonhuman animals whose behavioral repertoires are different from ours and who lack language.
|Keywords||Philosophy of mind Brain imaging Persistent vegetative state Animal ethics|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Adam Shriver (2009). Knocking Out Pain in Livestock: Can Technology Succeed Where Morality has Stalled? Neuroethics 2 (3):115-124.
Daniel Buchman & Peter Reiner (2009). Stigma and Addiction: Being and Becoming. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (9):18-19.
Monika Piotrowska (2014). Transferring Morality to Human–Nonhuman Chimeras. American Journal of Bioethics 14 (2):4-12.
Similar books and articles
Colin Allen & Marc D. Hauser (1991). Concept Attribution in Nonhuman Animals: Theoretical and Methodological Problems in Ascribing Complex Mental Processes. Philosophy of Science 58 (2):221-240.
John F. Stins & Steven Laureys (2009). Thought Translation, Tennis and Turing Tests in the Vegetative State. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 8 (3):361-370.
Jerome A. Shaffer (1961). Could Mental States Be Brain Processes? Journal of Philosophy 58 (December):813-22.
H. M. Giebel (2006). The Separate Minds of Church and State: Collective Mental States and Th Eir Unsettling Implications. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 80:141-150.
Guy Kahane & Julian Savulescu (2009). Brain-Damaged Patients and the Moral Significance of Consciousness. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (1):6-26.
Baron Reed (2005). Accidentally Factive Mental States. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (1):134–142.
Francis V. Raab (1965). Of Minds and Molecules. Philosophy of Science 32 (January):57-72.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads60 ( #37,571 of 1,696,808 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #81,860 of 1,696,808 )
How can I increase my downloads?