NANOTECHNOLOGY IN BRAINCOMPUTER INTERACTIONS CASE STUDY Ineke Malsch
NANOTECHNOLOGY IN BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERACTIONS CASE STUDY Ineke Malsch, Malsch Techno. Valuation October 2017 THE NANO 2 ALL PROJECT HAS RECEIVED FUNDING FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION’S HORIZON 2020 RESEARCH AND INNOVATION PROGRAMME, UNDER THE GRANT AGREEMENT NUMBER 685931. THIS PUBLICATION REFLECTS ONLY THE AUTHOR’S VIEW AND THE COMMISSION IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY USE THAT MAY BE MADE OF THE INFORMATION IT CONTAINS.
01. NANOTECHNOLOGY IN BCI INTRODUCTION q This case study introduces mutual learning and dialogue on neuro-enhancement technology through the findings of the EU funded NERRI project Sam Kassegne, deputy director for the CSNE at SDSU, and colleagues developed electrodes made out of glassy carbon. | Credit: Sam Kassegne | https: //phys. org/news/2017 -02 -big-braincomputer-interface. html#j. Cp q There is already an ongoing discussion on brain-computer interactions q The Nano 2 All project broadens this discussion from scientists and lay persons to all stakeholder communities 2
01. NANOTECHNOLOGY IN BCI INTRODUCTION What is BCI? What is the NERRI Project? • A brain-computer interface is a device that can directly translate brain signals to actions, such as the operation of software applications (e. g. a word processor), or equipment (e. g. a television). Small sensors – placed on or inside the brain capture the signals and communicate these to an external device. This may allow you to control a machine by only using your thoughts. • The NERRI project aimed to start societal engagement on the ethical, legal, social and economic aspects of neuroenhancement technologies. 3
02. MUTUAL LEARNING IN THE NERRI PROJECT CASE STUDY DESCRIPTION q The NERRI project organised mutual learning exercises on neuroenhancement technologies q Experts and lay persons participated in social experiments and role plays q Participants can be divided into three subcultures: Early adopters People interested but skeptical about the riskbenefit balance q The ambiance influenced the learning process Cautious or suspicious citizens 4
02. MUTUAL LEARNING IN THE NERRI PROJECT CASE STUDY DESCRIPTION CASE 1: SUPER ME • In 50 years, everyone is using brain enhancers. A dialogue was held on regulation aiming to balance personal freedom and the common good. CASE 2: SUPER MI • Citizens and experts discussed neuro-technologies, neuro-ethics and social and economic impacts. The majority approved these technologies for optimising the age-related cognitive capabilities of healthy people but were more negative regarding these technologies for recreational uses. CASE 3: DRAMA IN A SCIENCE CAFÉ • Students enacted drama to visualise dilemmas of the use of neuro-enhancement. This helped participants to understand the issues and take a position. 5
Image: Imperial College of London - http: //www. imperial. ac. uk/hamlyncentre/research/robotics/brain-computer-interface/ 03. QUESTIONS TO STAKEHOLDERS QUESTIONS FOR STAKEHOLDERS Which subculture do you fit in? What would you like to learn from other stakeholders in a dialogue? Should the aim be to reach consensus or to articulate different perspectives? 6
04. RESPONSIBLE DIALOGUE ON NEURO-ENHANCEMENT CONCLUSION q The discussion on nanotechnology in Brain-Computer Interactions is a continuation of an earlier dialogue. A resorbable electronic circuit begins to dissolve. | Credit: Fiorenzo Omenetto, Tufts. | https: //www. biotechniques. com/news/Electronics. Get-a-New-Vanishing-Act/biotechniques 335540. html? service=print#. UHL 02 FIZ_0 g q Different positions can be taken regarding the ethical issues raised. q In NANO 2 ALL, the diversity of stakeholders is greater, as it also involves policy makers, industry, civil society organisations and journalists. q As in NERRI, the ambiance and tools offered to participants can stimulate more fruitful dialogue than in traditional discussions. 7 q In NANO 2 ALL, tools to stimulate creativity, such as the adapted
05. FURTHER INFORMATION REFERENCES q NERRI project website: http: //www. nerri. eu/ q Hub Zwart, Jonna Brenninkmeijer, Peter Eduard, Lotte Krabbenborg, Sheena Laursen, Gema Revuelta, Winnie Toonders (2017) Reflection as a Deliberative and Distributed Practice: Assessing Neuro-Enhancement Technologies via Mutual Learning Exercises (MLEs). Nanoethics: https: //link. springer. com/article/10. 1007/s 11569 -017 -0287 -4 8
THANK YOU
- Slides: 9