Zentrum für interdisziplinäre Forschung

Neurotechnology has sparked public and scientific debate - especially the use of brain-computer interfaces, brain stimulation and neurochemicals for neuroenhancement. This includes the enhancement of cognitive functions such as concentration, memory or executive functions without medical necessity. Societal processes such as the quest for self-optimization or changes in and outside the labor market (e.g. intensification of labor, increasing stress, and cognitive demands) may have created the desire, but also the pressure, to engage in such neuroenhancement. In addition, pioneering work and scientific breakthroughs in recent years have fueled the hype around neurotechnologies. In addition to false hopes or harmful effects, concerns about authenticity, fairness in competitive situations, and other issues have led to discussions about the complex ethical, legal and social implications of using or rejecting neurotechnology.

The interdisciplinary workshop “Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Neuroenhancement: Developments and Impact on the Individual and Society” took place at ZiF from 10 – 12 December 2024 and was led by the sociologists Sebastian Sattler (Bielefeld University) and Guido Mehlkop (University of Erfurt), the philosopher Saskia Nagel (RWTH Aachen University) and the psychiatrist Dimitris Repantis (Charité Berlin). It was funded by ZiF and the Fritz Thyssen Foundation. It brought together early career and established sociologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, ethicists, cognitive, and political scientists to discuss the complexity of neuroenhancement around four key questions:

1. What is currently possible with neurotechnology concerning cognitive enhancement (CE) purposes and which developments can be expected in the (near) future?

2. What are the associated ethical, legal, and social issues of using/refusing neurotechnology for cognitive enhancement?

3. Which empirical evidence underlines the extent of these issues (e.g., studies on prevalence, causes and consequences of cognitions and emotions on such neurotechnology, and of the respective use/non-use on the individual and society)?

4. How should a possible prevention of detrimental individual and societal consequences of neurotechnology use/non-use or regulations and legal norms reflect this (e.g., how to deal with the uncertainties of neurotechnology, including counselling users, training people [building literacy], advertising techs, and media representation)?

(Photo: Universität Bielefeld/P. Ottendörfer)

The workshop combined four keynotes that were livestreamed and recorded, longer talks, short talks, a poster session, and science walks to advance discussions on the topic and stimulate new collaborations. The workshop group also engaged in gathering and revising ideas for a joint workshop paper led by Sebastian Sattler and the health ethicist Eric Racine (IRCM Montréal). At the workshop, participants were concerned about the limitations of several neurotechnologies for neuroenhancement, but also discussed the potential of other neurotechnologies. Although the use of most potential neuroenhancers appears to be limited in the general population, several million adults in Germany have personal experience, for example, by using prescription drugs to improve their cognitive function. This also implies that they accept health risks (e.g. with partly unknown negative effects). Participants explored the multiple drivers (e.g. stress, peers, media, status-seeking, preferences for high levels of intelligence or self-treatment of subclinical mental illness) and their counterparts (e.g. moral concerns, personal resources) behind the use of neuroenhancement. Lack of knowledge was seen as a problem for informed use. The group also discussed the social implications in different areas of life (e.g. education or work). One concern was that the use, but also the rejection, of neurotechnology could lead to stigmatization, including a racialization of human cognition. Frameworks and means of regulation were discussed (including neurorights and the use of digital data produced by various neurotechnologies). The planned joint workshop publication aims to enrich further discussion in the field.