Skip to main content
Log in

Enhanced Cognition, Enhanced Self? On Neuroenhancement and Subjectivity

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Cognitive Enhancement Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates the implications of neuroenhancement from a first-person and phenomenological perspective that focuses on the role of the human brain and body as mediators of subjective experience. This analysis is conducted both on historical-philosophical and empirical grounds. At the historical-philosophical level, this article examines the frameworks of phenomenology and embodied cognition to explore how these theoretical approaches link the materiality of the body (including that of exogenous integrations such as implants) to the way in which subjects perceive themselves and experience reality. At the empirical level, the article attempts to corroborate this philosophical stance by critically assessing the emerging body of scientific evidence on the phenomenological effects of neuroenhancement technologies. Based on a narrative mini-review, this paper will argue that the quantitative enhancement of a cognitive or other physical function of the human body does not necessarily result in an equal qualitative improvement of a subject’s phenomenological experience. Indeed, a physical alteration designed to quantitatively augment a specific human capability may have ambivalent effects on how the subject experientially perceives that modification. This indeterminacy between the quantitative and qualitative dimension of neuroenhancement seems to challenge the thesis that any objectively measured improvement of a cognitive or other physical function of the human body directly corresponds to better personal and psychological well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Battleday, R. M., & Brem, A.-K. (2015). Modafinil for cognitive neuroenhancement in healthy non-sleep-deprived subjects: a systematic review. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 25(11), 1865–1881.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bolt, L. (2007). True to oneself? Broad and narrow ideas on authenticity in the enhancement debate. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 28(4), 285.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, N., & Sandberg, A. (2009). Cognitive enhancement: methods, ethics, regulatory challenges. Science and Engineering Ethics, 15(3), 311–341.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brukamp, K. (2013). Better brains or bitter brains? The ethics of neuroenhancement. In Cognitive enhancement (pp. 99–112). Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Bullington, J. (2013). The lived body. In The expression of the psychosomatic body from a phenomenological perspective (pp. 19–37). Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Collomb-Clerc, A., & Welter, M.-L. (2015). Effects of deep brain stimulation on balance and gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease: a systematic neurophysiological review. Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology, 45(4–5), 371–388.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, N. (2000). Normal functioning and the treatment-enhancement distinction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 9(3), 309–322.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Haan, S., Rietveld, E., Stokhof, M., & Denys, D. (2013). The phenomenology of deep brain stimulation-induced changes in OCD: an enactive affordance-based model. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 653.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • De Hemptinne, C., Swann, N. C., Ostrem, J. L., Ryapolova-Webb, E. S., San Luciano, M., Galifianakis, N. B., et al. (2015). Therapeutic deep brain stimulation reduces cortical phase-amplitude coupling in Parkinson’s disease. Nature Neuroscience, 18(5), 779.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • de Sio, F., Robichaud, P., & Vincent, NA. (2014). Who should enhance? Conceptual and normative dimensions of cognitive enhancement. Humana Mente Journal of Philosophical Studies, 26, 179–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGrazia, D. (2000). Prozac, enhancement, and self-creation. Hastings Center Report, 30(2), 34–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Farah, M. J., Smith, M. E., Ilieva, I., & Hamilton, R. H. (2014). Cognitive enhancement. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 5(1), 95–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fenoy, A. J., & Simpson, R. K. (2014). Risks of common complications in deep brain stimulation surgery: management and avoidance. Journal of Neurosurgery, 120(1), 132–139.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Flöel, A. (2014). tDCS-enhanced motor and cognitive function in neurological diseases. Neuroimage, 85, 934–947.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Franke, A. G., Lieb, K., & Hildt, E. (2012). What users think about the differences between caffeine and illicit/prescription stimulants for cognitive enhancement. PLoS One, 7(6), e40047.

  • Gallagher, S., & Zahavi, D. (2007). The phenomenological mind: an introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garasic, M. D., & Lavazza, A. (2016). Moral and social reasons to acknowledge the use of cognitive enhancers in competitive-selective contexts. BMC Medical Ethics, 17(1), 18.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Geroulanos, S., & Meyers, T. (2009). A graft, physiological and philosophical: Jean-Luc Nancy’s L’Intrus. Parallax, 15(2), 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, F. (2015). Self-estrangement & deep brain stimulation: ethical issues related to forced explantation. Neuroethics, 8(2), 107–114. 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, F., Goddard, E., Viaña, J. N. M., Carter, A., & Horne, M. (2017). I miss being me: phenomenological effects of deep brain stimulation. AJOB Neuroscience, 8(2), 96–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glannon, W. (2009). Stimulating brains, altering minds. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35(5), 289–292.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glannon, W. (2015). Neuromodulation and the mind-brain relation. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 9, 22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A. M., Witt, J. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2013). From the revolution to embodiment: 25 years of cognitive psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(5), 573–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. R., Braver, T. S., & Raichle, M. E. (2002). Integration of emotion and cognition in the lateral prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(6), 4115–4120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greely, H., Sahakian, B., Harris, J., Kessler, R. C., Gazzaniga, M., Campbell, P., et al. (2008). Towards responsible use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy. Nature, 456(7223), 702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J., & Chan, S. (2008). Enhancement is good for you! Understanding the ethics of genetic enhancement. Gene Therapy, 15(5), 338–339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyer, A., & Slaby, J. (2014). Jenseits von Ethik. Zur Kritik der neuroethischen Enhancement-Debatte. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 62(5), 823–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1950). Ideen zu einer reinen Phanomenologie und phanomenologischen Philosophie. Felix Meiner Verlag.

  • Ienca, M. (2018). Cognitive technology and human-machine interaction: the contribution of externalism to the theoretical foundations of machine and cyborg ethics. Annals of the University of Bucharest - Philosophy Series, 66(2), 91–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ilieva, I., Boland, J., & Farah, M. J. (2013). Objective and subjective cognitive enhancing effects of mixed amphetamine salts in healthy people. Neuropharmacology, 64, 496–505.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Karpin, I., & Mykitiuk, R. (2008). Going out on a limb: prosthetics, normalcy and disputing the therapy-enhancement distinction. Medical Law Review, 16(3), 413–436.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klaming, L., & Haselager, P. (2013). Did my brain implant make me do it? Questions raised by DBS regarding psychological continuity, responsibility for action and mental competence. Neuroethics, 6(3), 527–539.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kraemer, F. (2011). Authenticity anyone? The enhancement of emotions via neuro-psychopharmacology. Neuroethics, 4(1), 51–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kraemer, F. (2013). Me, myself and my brain implant: deep brain stimulation raises questions of personal authenticity and alienation. Neuroethics, 6(3), 483–497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krüger, M., & Ebersbach, M. (2017). Mental rotation and the human body: children’s inflexible use of embodiment mirrors that of adults. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 36, 418–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landes, D. A. (2007). Le Toucher and the corpus of tact: Exploring touch and technicity with Jacques Derrida and Jean-Luc Nancy. L’Esprit Créateur, 47(3), 80–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, L. J., Liechti, M. E., Herzig, F., & Schaub, M. P. (2013). To dope or not to dope: neuroenhancement with prescription drugs and drugs of abuse among Swiss university students. PLoS One, 8(11), e77967.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mehlman, M. J. (2004). Cognition-enhancing drugs. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(3), 483–506.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. (1945). Phénoménologie de la perception. Éditions Gallimard, English translation.

  • Molloy, D. W., & Standish, T. I. (1997). A guide to the standardized mini-mental state examination. International Psychogeriatrics, 9(1), 87–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moya, P. (2014). Habit and embodiment in Merleau-Ponty. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 542.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nancy, J. L. (2000). L’intrus. Paris: Galilée.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietzsche, F. W. (1914). The complete works of Friedrich Nietzsche: thus Spake Zarathustra (vol. 11). Edinburgh: TN Foulis.

  • Pascual-Leone, A., Freitas, C., Oberman, L., Horvath, J. C., Halko, M., Eldaief, M., et al. (2011). Characterizing brain cortical plasticity and network dynamics across the age-span in health and disease with TMS-EEG and TMS-fMRI. Brain Topography, 24(3–4), 302–315.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Pluta, R. M., Perazza, G. D., & Golub, R. M. (2011). Deep brain stimulation. JAMA, 305(7), 732–732.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, D. C., Shneerson, J. M., & File, S. E. (2005). Cognitive effects of modafinil in student volunteers may depend on IQ. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 82(1), 133–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repantis, D. (2013). Psychopharmacological neuroenhancement: evidence on safety and efficacy. In Cognitive enhancement: trends in augmentation of human performance (pp. 20–38). Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Riemersma-Van Der Lek, R. F., Swaab, D. F., Twisk, J., Hol, E. M., Hoogendijk, W. J., & Van Someren, E. J. (2008). Effect of bright light and melatonin on cognitive and noncognitive function in elderly residents of group care facilities: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 299(22), 2642–2655.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J. (2006). Justice, fairness, and enhancement. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1093(1), 321–338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu, J., ter Meulen, R., & Kahane, G. (2011). Enhancing human capacities. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schelle, K. J., Faulmüller, N., Caviola, L., & Hewstone, M. (2014). Attitudes toward pharmacological cognitive enhancement—a review. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 8, 53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenberg, M. R., Maddux, B. N., Riley, D. E., Whitney, C. M., Ogrocki, P. K., Gould, D., et al. (2015). Five-months-postoperative neuropsychological outcome from a pilot prospective randomized clinical trial of thalamic deep brain stimulation for T ourette syndrome. Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface, 18(2), 97–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seepanomwan, K., Caligiore, D., Cangelosi, A., & Baldassarre, G. (2015). Generalisation, decision making, and embodiment effects in mental rotation: A neurorobotic architecture tested with a humanoid robot. Neural Networks, 72, 31–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. W. (2018). Phenomenology. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/phenomenology/

  • Smith, M. E., & Farah, M. J. (2011). Are prescription stimulants “smart pills”? The epidemiology and cognitive neuroscience of prescription stimulant use by normal healthy individuals. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 717.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Synofzik, M., & Schlaepfer, T. E. (2008). Stimulating personality: ethical criteria for deep brain stimulation in psychiatric patients and for enhancement purposes. Biotechnology Journal: Healthcare Nutrition Technology, 3(12), 1511–1520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talpos, J. C., Aerts, N., Fellini, L., & Steckler, T. (2014). A touch-screen based paired-associates learning (PAL) task for the rat may provide a translatable pharmacological model of human cognitive impairment. Pharmacology, Biochemistry, and Behavior, 122, 97–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Urban, K. R., & Gao, W.-J. (2017). Psychostimulants as cognitive enhancers in adolescents: more risk than reward? Frontiers in Public Health, 5, 260.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, E. J., & Petróczi, A. (2016). “It was me on a good day”: exploring the smart drug use phenomenon in England. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 779.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, P. J. (2017). Cognitive extension, enhancement, and the phenomenology of thinking. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 16(1), 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. M. (1991). Memory assessment scales. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

  • Wilson, R. A., & Foglia, L. (2017). Embodied cognition. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/embodied-cognition/

  • Wolpe, P. R. (2002). Treatment, enhancement, and the ethics of neurotherapeutics. Brain and Cognition, 50(3), 387–395.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, D. (2002). First-person thoughts and embodied self-awareness: some reflections on the relation between recent analytical philosophy and phenomenology. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 1(1), 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohny, H. (2015). The myth of cognitive enhancement drugs. Neuroethics, 8(3), 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohny, H. (2016). Enhancement, disability and the riddle of the relevant circumstances. Journal of Medical Ethics, 42(9), 605–610.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (407540_167223) and Schweizerische Akademie der Medizinischen Wissenschaften (KZS 20/17).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Agata Ferretti.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferretti, A., Ienca, M. Enhanced Cognition, Enhanced Self? On Neuroenhancement and Subjectivity. J Cogn Enhanc 2, 348–355 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-018-0109-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-018-0109-9

Keywords

Navigation