1. Levy, N. Neuroethics: A new way of doing ethics. AJOB Neuroscience 2012;2(2):3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Farah, M. Neuroethics: The ethical, legal, and societal impact of neuroscience. Annual Review of Psychology 2012;63:571–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

3. Giordano, J, Benedikter, R. An early—and necessary—flight of the Owl of Minerva: Neuroscience, neurotechnology, human socio-cultural boundaries, and the importance of neuroethics. Journal of Evolution and Technology 2012;22(1):14–25.Google Scholar

4. Shook, JR, Giordano, J. A principled and cosmopolitan neuroethics: Considerations for international relevance. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2014;9(1):article 1.Google ScholarPubMed

5. Beauchamp, T, Childress, J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1979.Google Scholar

6. Lanzilao, E, Shook, JR, Benedikter, R, Giordano, J. Advancing neuroscience on the 21st century world stage: The need for—and proposed structure of—an internationally relevant neuroethics. Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine 2013;4(3):211–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Spranger, T, ed. International Neurolaw: A Comparative Analysis. Berlin: Springer; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. Savulescu, J, Bostrom, N. Human enhancement ethics: The state of the debate. In: Savulescu, J, Bostrom, N, eds. Human Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008:1–22.Google Scholar

9. Lin, P, Allhoff, F. Untangling the debate: The ethics of human enhancement. NanoEthics 2008;2(3):251–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. Chatterjee, A. The ethics of neuroenhancement. Handbook of Clinical Neurology 2013;118:323–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

11. Gordijn, B, Chadwick, R, eds. Medical Enhancement and Posthumanity. Berlin: Springer; 2008.Google Scholar

12. More, M, Vita-More, N. The Transhumanist Reader. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Benedikter, R, Giordano, J, FitzGerald, K. The future of the self-image of the human being in the age of transhumanism, neurotechnology and global transition. Futures 2010;42(10):1102–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Giordano, J. A preparatory neuroethical approach to assessing developments in neurotechnology. AMA Journal of Ethics 2015;17(1):56–61.Google ScholarPubMed

15. Garrett, J, Jotterand, F, Ralston, DC. The Development of Bioethics in the United States. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16. See note 4, Shook, Giordano 2014.

17. Parens, E. Is better always good? The enhancement project. Hastings Center Report 1998;28(1):S1–S15, at S2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

18. Daniels, N. Normal functioning and the treatment-enhancement distinction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2000;9(3):309–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

19. Resnik, D. The moral significance of the therapy-enhancement distinction in human genetics. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2000;9(3):365–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

20. Kamm, F. Is there a problem with enhancement? American Journal of Bioethics 2005;5(3):5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21. Chadwick, R. Therapy, enhancement and improvement. In: Gordjin, B, Chadwick, R, eds. Medical Enhancement and Posthumanity. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008:25–37.Google Scholar

22. Savulescu, J, Sandberg, A, Kahan, G. Well-being and enhancement. In: Savulescu, J, ter Meulen, R, Kahane, G, eds. Enhancing Human Capacities. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2011:3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. Shook, JR, Giordano, J, Galvagni, L. Cognitive enhancement kept within contexts: Neuroethics and informed public policy. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 2014;8:article 228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

24. Camporesi, S. Oscar Pistorius, enhancement and post-humans. Journal of Medical Ethics 2008;34(9):639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

25. Van Hilvoorde, I, Landeweerd, L. Enhancing disabilities: Transhumanism under the veil of inclusion? Disability and Rehabilitation 2010;32(26):2222–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

26. Hoberman, J. Sports physicians, human nature, and the limits of medical enhancement. In: Tolleneer, J, Sterckx, S, Bonte, P, eds. Athletic Enhancement, Human Nature and Ethics. Berlin: Springer; 2013:255–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. Ahmad, C, Grantham, W, Greiwe, R. Public perceptions of Tommy John surgery. The Physician and Sportsmedicine 2012;40(2):64–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

28. Gini, A, Giordano, J. The human condition and strivings to flourish. In: Giordano, J, Gordijn, B, eds. Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010:343–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29. Branson, J, Miller, D. Damned for Their Difference: The Cultural Construction of Deaf People as “Disabled.” Washington, DC: Gallaudet University; 2002.Google Scholar

30. Wolbring, G. Hearing beyond the normal enabled by therapeutic devices: The role of the recipient and the hearing profession. Neuroethics 2013;6(3):607–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

31. Shickle, D. Are “genetic enhancements” really enhancements? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2000;9:342–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

32. Jotterand, F. Beyond therapy and enhancement: The alteration of human nature. NanoEthics 2008;2(1):15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33. De Melo-Martín, I. Defending human enhancement technologies: Unveiling normativity. Journal of Medical Ethics 2010;36(8):483–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

34. Buchanan, A. Beyond Humanity? The Ethics of Biomedical Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35. Agar, N. Radical human enhancement, and what’s wrong with it. In: Basl, J, Sandler, R, eds. Designer Biology. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books; 2013:87–104.Google Scholar

36. Gordijn, B.Enhancement. In: ten Have, H, Gordijn, B, eds. Handbook of Global Bioethics. Berlin: Springer; 2014:649–70.Google Scholar

37. Hickman, L. Philosophical Tools for Technological Culture: Putting Pragmatism to Work. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 2001.Google Scholar

38. Racine, E. Pragmatic Neuroethics: Improving Treatment and Understanding of the Mind-Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2010.Google Scholar

39. Solymosi, T, Shook, JR. Neuropragmatism: A neurophilosophical manifesto. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 2013;5(1):212–33.Google Scholar

40. Solymosi, T, Shook, JR, eds. Neuroscience, Neurophilosophy and Pragmatism: Brains at Work with the World. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

41. Oishi, M, Mitchell, I, Van der Loos, H, eds. Design and Use of Assistive Technology: Social, Technical, Ethical, and Economic Challenges. Dordrecht: Springer; 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42. Academy of Medical Sciences. Human Enhancement and the Future of Work. London: Academy of Medical Sciences; 2012.Google Scholar

43. Rowland, N, Breshears, J, Chang, E. Neurosurgery and the dawning age of brain-machine interfaces. Surgical Neurology International 2013;4(1 Suppl):S11–14.Google ScholarPubMed

44. Vehmas, S, Mäkelä, P. A realist account of the ontology of impairment. Journal of Medical Ethics 2008;34(2):93–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

45. Bradshow, H, ter Meulen, R. A transhumanist fault line around disability: Morphological freedom and the obligation to enhance. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2010;35(6):670–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

46. Wasserman, D, Asch, A. A duty to discriminate? American Journal of Bioethics 2012;12(4):22–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47. Wolbring, G. Ethical theories and discourses through an ability expectations and ableism lens: The case of enhancement and global regulation. Asian Bioethics Review 2012;4(4):293–309.Google Scholar

48. Turnbull, HR Jr, Stowe, MJ. Five models for thinking about disability: Implications for policy responses. Journal of Disability Policy Studies 2001;12(3):198–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

49. Thomas, C. How is disability understood? An examination of sociological approaches. Disability & Society 2004;19(6):569–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

50. Mitra, S. The capability approach and disability. Journal of Disability Policy Studies 2006;16(4):236–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

51. Masala, C, Petretto, D. From disablement to enablement: Conceptual models of disability in the 20th century. Disability & Rehabilitation 2008;30(17):1233–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

52. Barnes, C. Understanding the social model of disability: Past, present and future. In: Watson, N, Roulstone, A, Thomas, C, eds. Routledge Handbook of Disability Studies. London and New York: Routledge; 2012:12–29.Google Scholar

53. World Health Organization. CBR: A Strategy for Rehabilitation, Equalization of Opportunities, Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004.Google Scholar

54. Nussbaum, M. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2006.Google Scholar

55. World Health Organization and World Bank. World Report on Disability. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.Google Scholar

56. Bickenbach, J, Felder, F, Schmitz, B, eds. Disability and the Good Human Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

57. Vehmas, S, Shakespeare, T. Disability, harm, and the origins of limited opportunities. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2014;23(1):41–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

58. Mahoney, J, Palyo, N, Napier, G, Giordano, J. The therapeutic milieu reconceptualized for the 21st century. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing 2009;23(6):423–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

59. Ip, K-T, ed. The Bioethics of Regenerative Medicine. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60. Whyte, J. A grand unified theory of rehabilitation (we wish!). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2008;89(2):203–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

61. Hart, T, Tsaousides, T, Zanca, J, Whyte, J, Packel, A, Ferraro, M, et al. Toward a theory-driven classification of rehabilitation treatments. Archives of Physical and Medical Rehabilitation 2014;95(1 Suppl):33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

62. MacLachlan, M, Gallagher, P. Enabling Technologies: Body Image and Body Function. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2004.Google Scholar

63. Hansson, S. The ethics of enabling technology. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2007;16(3):257–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

64. VanHiel, L. Treatment and enablement in rehabilitation research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2014;95(1 Suppl):88–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

65. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Washington, DC: EEOC; 2002; available at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html (last accessed 4 July 2015).Google Scholar

66. Ikäheimo, H. Personhood and the social inclusion of people with disabilities: A recognition-theoretical approach. In: Kristiansen, K, Vehmas, S, Shakespeare, T, eds. Arguing about Disability: Philosophical Perspectives. London and New York: Routledge; 2008:77–92.Google Scholar

67. Rimmerman, A. Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities: National and International Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013.Google Scholar

68. Chatterjee, A. Cosmetic neurology and cosmetic surgery: Parallels, predictions, and challenges. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2007;16(2):129–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

69. Earp, B, Sandberg, A, Savulescu, J. Brave new love: The threat of high-tech “conversion” therapy and the bio-oppression of sexual minorities. AJOB Neuroscience 2014;5(1):4–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

70. See note 28, Gini, Giordano 2010.

71. Williams, S, Higgs, P, Katz, S. Neuroculture, active ageing and the “older brain”: Problems, promises and prospects. Sociology of Health and Illness 2012;34(1):64–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

72. Erler, A. Does memory modification threaten our authenticity? Neuroethics 2011;4:235–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

73. Glannon, W. Neuropsychological aspects of enhancing the will. The Monist 2012;95(3):378–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

74. Kraemer, F. Me, myself and my brain implant: Deep brain stimulation raises questions of personal authenticity and alienation. Neuroethics 2013;6:483–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

75. Parvizi, J, Rangarajan, V, Shirer, W, Desai, N, Greicius, M. The will to persevere induced by electrical stimulation of the human cingulate gyrus. Neuron 2013;80(6):1359–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

76. Mecacci, G, Haselager, W. Stimulating the self: The influence of conceptual frameworks on reactions to deep brain stimulation. AJOB Neuroscience 2014;5(4):30–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77. Hamilton, R, Messing, S, Chatterjee, A. Rethinking the thinking cap: Ethics of neural enhancement using noninvasive brain stimulation. Neurology 2011;76(2):187–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

78. Giordano, J. Neurogenetic and neural tissue implantation technology: Neuroethical, legal and social issues. In: Giordano, J, ed. Neurotechnology: Premises, Potential and Problems. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2012:59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

79. Heinrichs, J-H. The promises and perils of non-invasive brain stimulation. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 2012;35(2):121–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

80. Kadosh, RC, Levy, N, O’Shea, J, Shea, N, Savulescu, J. The neuroethics of non-invasive brain stimulation. Current Biology 2012;22(4): R108–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

81. Jebari, K. Brain machine interface and human enhancement: An ethical review. Neuroethics 2013;6(3):617–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82. Cabrera, L, Evans, E, Hamilton, R. Ethics of the electrified mind: Defining issues and perspectives on the principled use of brain stimulation in medical research and clinical care. Brain Topography 2014;27(1):33–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

83. McCullagh, P, Lightbody, G, Jygierewicz, J, Kernohan, WG. Ethical challenges associated with the development and deployment of brain computer interface technology. Neuroethics 2014;7(2):109–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

84. DeGrazia, D. Enhancement technologies and human identity. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2005;30(3):261–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

85. Brey, P. Human enhancement and personal identity. In: Olsen, B, ed. New Waves in the Philosophy of Technology. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan; 2009:169–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

86. Costa, P. Personal identity and the nature of the self. In: Giordano, J, Gordijn, B, eds. Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010:117–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

87. Baylis, F. Neuroethics and identity. In: Clausen, J, Levy, N, eds. Handbook of Neuroethics. Berlin: Springer; 2014:367–72.Google Scholar

88. Elliot, C. Enhancement technologies and the modern self. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2011;36(4):364–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

89. Kraemer, F. Authenticity or autonomy? When deep brain stimulation causes a dilemma. Journal of Medical Ethics 2013;39(2):757–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

90. Agar, N. The threat to human identities from too much enhancement. In: Agar, N. Truly Human Enhancement: A Philosophical Defense of Limits. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2014:55–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

91. Glannon, W. Neuromodulation, agency and autonomy. Brain Topography 2014;27(1):46–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

92. Savulescu, J, Douglas, T, Persson, I. Autonomy and the ethics of biological behaviour modification. In: Akabayashi, A, ed. The Future of Bioethics: International Dialogues. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014:91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

93. Merkel, R, Boer, G, Fegert, J, Galert, T, Hartmann, D, Nuttin, B, et al. Intervening in the Brain: Changing Psyche and Society. Dordrecht: Springer; 2007.Google Scholar

94. Klaming, L, Haselager, P. Did my brain implant make me do it? Questions raised by DBS regarding psychological continuity, responsibility for action and mental competence. Neuroethics 2013;6:527–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

95. Vincent, N, ed. Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

96. Wurzman, R, Giordano, J. NEURINT and neuroweapons: Neurotechnologies in national intelligence and defense. In: Giordano, J, ed. Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense: Practical Considerations, Neuroethical Concerns. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2014:79–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

97. Savulescu, J, Persson, I. Getting moral enhancement right. Bioethics 2011;27(3):124–31.Google Scholar

98. Tennison, M. Moral transhumanism: The next step. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2012;37(4):405–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

99. Kabasenche, W. Engineering for virtue? Toward holistic moral enhancement. In: Basl, J, Sandler, R, eds. Designer Biology. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books; 2013:69–81.Google Scholar

100. Shook, JR. Neuroethics and the possible types of moral enhancement. AJOB Neuroscience 2012;3(4):3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

101. Kamieński, Ł. Helping the postmodern Ajax: Is managing combat trauma through pharmacology a Faustian bargain? Armed Forces and Society 2013;39(3):395–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

102. Olsthoorn, P.Military Ethics and Virtues: An Interdisciplinary Approach for the 21st Century. London and New York: Routledge; 2011.Google Scholar

103. Mehlman, M, Lin, P, Abney, K. Enhanced warfighters: A policy framework. In: Gross, M, Carrick, D, eds. Military Medical Ethics for the 21st Century. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate; 2013:130–43.Google Scholar

104. Ford, K, Glymour, C. The enhanced warfighter. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 2014;70(1):43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

105. Bomann-Larsen, L. Voluntary rehabilitation? On neurotechnological behavioural treatment, valid consent and (in)appropriate offers. Neuroethics 2013;6(1):65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

106. Chandler, J. Autonomy and the unintended legal consequences of emerging neurotherapies. Neuroethics 2013;6(2):249–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

107. Robbins, L. Refusing to be all that you can be: Regulating against forced cognitive enhancement in the military. In: Gross, D, Carrick, D, eds. Military Medical Ethics for the 21st Century. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate; 2013:144–55.Google Scholar

108. National Research Council. Opportunities in Neuroscience for Future Army Applications. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2009.Google Scholar

109. Moreno, J. Mind Wars: Brain Science and the Military in the 21st Century. New York: Bellevue Literary Press; 2012.Google Scholar

110. Kotchetkov, I, Hwang, B, Appelboom, G, Kellner, C, Connolly, E. Brain-computer interfaces: Military, neurosurgical, and ethical perspective. Neurosurgical Focus 2010;28(5):1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

111. Russo, M, Stetz, M, Stetz, T. Ethical considerations: Cogniceuticals in the military. In: Chatterjee, A, Farah, M, eds. Neuroethics in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

112. Parasidis, E. Human enhancement and experimental research in the military. Connecticut Law Review 2012;44(4):1117–32.Google Scholar

113. Sehm, B, Ragert, P. Why non-invasive brain stimulation should not be used in military and security services. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2013;7:article 553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

114. LaCroix, A, Burnam-Fink, M, Galliott, J, Vallor, S, French, S, Abney, K, et al. Super soldiers: The ethical, legal and operational implications (part 2). In: Thompson, S, ed. Global Issues and Ethical Considerations in Human Enhancement Technologies. Hershey, PA: IGI Global; 2014:139–60.Google Scholar

115. Mehlman, M.Captain America and Iron Man: Biological, genetic, and psychological enhancement and the warrior ethos. In: Lucas, G, ed. Routledge Handbook of Military Ethics. London and New York: Routledge; 2015:406–20.Google Scholar

116. Bublitz, J, Merkel, R. Crimes against minds: On mental manipulations, harms and a human right to mental self-determination. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2014;8(1):51–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

117. See note 4, Shook, Giordano 2014.