
Abstract
Neuroscience affords knowledge that can be leveraged in the ontological valuation of individuals, groups, and species. Sociocultural sentiments, norms, and mores may impede embracing such knowledge to revise moral attitudes, ethics, and policies. We argue that the practices of neuroethics will be valuable in that they ground ethico-legal discourse in (1) naturalistic philosophy; (2) the current epistemological capital of neuroscience; (3) the issues, problems, and solutions arising in and from neuroscientific research and its applications; and 4) the use of neurocentric criteria—such as painience—to define and resolve ethical decisions regarding attitudes toward and treatment of nonhuman animals.
Item Type: | Journal article |
---|---|
Form of publication: | Publisher's Version |
Research Centers: | Humanwissenschaftliches Zentrum (HWZ) |
Subjects: | 100 Philosophy and Psychology > 100 Philosophy 100 Philosophy and Psychology > 170 Ethics |
URN: | urn:nbn:de:bvb:19-epub-59151-6 |
Alliance/National Licence: | This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively. |
Language: | English |
Item ID: | 59151 |
Date Deposited: | 26. Nov 2018, 14:23 |
Last Modified: | 04. Nov 2020, 13:38 |