PhD Program in Educational Neuroscience (PEN)
PEN 705 New Directions in Neuroethics
Fall 2013, 3 Credits
Professor Name: Professor James Giordano
Office Hours: TBA
VP/Phone: TBA
Email: TBA
Office Location: TBA
(Time/Day/Location of Class)
Syllabus content: Prof. James Giordano, PhD, MPhil
Course Description:
The field of neuroethics examines the ethical, social, and legal implications of the
application of neuroscience research to society. This course begins with a view of
how and why neuroscience has ‘evolved’ to become a dynamic force in both science
and society. Students will explore how bioethics has become a critical dimension of
any/all consideration of scientific advancement, particularly in light of modern
scientific, research and medical ethics, and as a consequence, of socio-political trends
and influences. From this, the field and practice of neuroethics will be addressed and
discussed, with relevance to the ways that progress in neuroscience compels and
sustains both the issues and dilemmas that arise in and from neuroscientific and
neurotechnological research and its applications, and the importance of
acknowledging and addressing the ethical basis and resolutions of such issues. An
overview of specific frontier areas of neuroscience and technology will be explored,
including core topics that involve Educational Neuroscience, with a special emphasis
on (a) the extent and scope of new knowledge and capability that such developments
afford to impact the human condition, and (b) key ethical concerns that are incurred
by such neuroscientific and neurotechnological progress. Paradigms for neuroethical,
legal, and social probity, safety and surety, and a putative “precautionary process”
will be explored. The ethical implications of the application of neuroscience research
to special and diverse populations of individuals will be of great salience in our
discussions.
Prerequisite: For students in Educational Neuroscience PhD program or Permission of
the instructor
SLO Chart: Please see below for a complete hart of SLOs, learning opportunities,
assessment methods, and alignment with department/program objectives.
Required Texts:
Giordano J, Gordijn B. (eds.) Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives in Neuroethics.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. (listed in readings assignment as SPPN)
Giordano J. (ed.) Neurotechnology: Premises, Potential, and Problems. Boca Raton:
CRC Press, 2012. (listed in readings assignment as NT:PPP)
Suggested Supplement(s):
Many of our hopes and fears are expressed in fiction, and current film has certainly been
a venue to communicate our expectations and anticipations about the utopian and/or
dystopian potentials of neuroscience and neurotechnology, and the ethical, legal and
social manifestations of such future trajectories. In light of this, certain films will be
suggested as “supplements” to the academic readings to foster insight – and discussion –
about colloquial conceptualizations and apprehensions fostered by the advancing tide of
neuroscientific advancement.
Grading Scale
A+
97-100
A
94-96
A90-93
B+
B
B-
87-89
84-86
80-83
C+
C
F
77-79
74-76
73 and below
Course Requirements (letter grade)
1. Posts and discussion participation (20% of grade). Students will be required to respond to
discussion initiated weekly by the instructor. Discussions will be initiated at the beginning of the week,
characteristically by the provision of a didactic presentation of key concepts, and selected readings. From
this a series of discussion issues and questions will be posted, to which students must respond by delving
into the required text and its supplementary literature (as provided at the end of each chapter). Students
must post at least once, by Thursday of each week. You will note in the grading scale that your online
conference participation counts towards your final grade.” Please read the following link on netiquette:
http://www.studygs.net/netiquette.htm.
2. Final paper (80% of grade). This course will conclude with a final paper focusing
upon a topic of students’ choice that elucidates and explores in greater detail an issue,
question, or problem in neuroethics. The final paper should be vetted and approved by the
instructors no later than the fifth week of class. The paper should be no less than 3500
words (plus references), fully referenced (Vancouver or Chicago style), and should seek
to synthesize and assimilate information gained throughout the semester into a working
knowledge, analysis, critique and/or review of some aspect of the ethical issues arising in,
and from neuroscience in research and/or application(s).
Class Schedule
WEEK
TOPIC
1
Overview of ethics: Historicity of bioethics
“Why neuroethics – why now?”
2
The historicity of neuroscience and technology
Rdg: Ch. 2 (SPPN)
3
The discipline and practice(s) of neuroethics: Two
“traditions” in reciprocity. What makes “neuro” important?
Rdg: Preface; Introduction: “Neuroethics- Coming of
age…” (SPPN)
Giordano. AJOB-Neurosci (2011)
Giordano. Hum Prospect (2011)
4
The uses and utility of neurotechnology: Potential and
problematic
Rdg: Ch. 1 (SPPN)
Ch. 1, 2 (NT:PPP)
5
Neuroimaging: Capabilities, limits and issues
Rdg: Ch. 11, 12 (SPPN)
Ch.4 (NT:PPP)
Giordano, AJOB-Neurosci (2012)
Film: Minority Report
6
Interventional techniques and technologies: Possibilities,
expectations and anxieties
Rdg: Ch. 9, 10.(SPPN)
Ch. 11 (NT:PPP)
Film: Gattica and/or Terminal Man
7
Future(s) of neurotechnology: Technological imperative(s),
cyborgization and the prudential question of what we can vs should
be done.
Rdg. Ch. 13, 14. (SPPN)
Ch. 10, 11, 12 (NT:PPP)
Benedikter, Giordano, FitzGerald. J. Futures (2010)
Film: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
8
Questions and dilemmas: The mind/body “problem” and
constructs of the self.
Rdg: Ch. 4, 5 (SPPN)
Ch. 8, 13 (NT:PPP)
Film: Blade Runner and/or I Robot
9
The neural basis of free will and morality: Can we handle
what we may learn?
Rdgs: Ch 6, 7. (SPPN)
10
Strivings to flourish: Treatment, enablement, enhancement
and neurocentric constructs of ‘normality’ – Confronting neuroontologies and the lessons of history.
Rdg: Ch. 17. (SPPN)
Ch. 3, 5, 16 (NT:PPP)
Film: Charly
11
The neuroscience of pain and a neuroethics of pain care:
Medical and social dimensions and pragmatic implications for
moral regard.
Rdg. Ch. 8 (SPPN)
Giordano, Benedikter, Boswell. Ethics, Biol Engineer
Med 2010, 1(2):133-140.
Loveless, Giordano. Camb Q Healthcare Ethics 2012
11(2): 166-179.
12
Neuroscience as a public good: Pluralist concerns and a
need for “NELSI”
Rdgs: Ch. 15, 16. (SPPN)
Ch. 16, 18 (NT:PPP)
Giordano, Olds AJOB-Neuroscience(2010)
13
Neuroethics as practice: Toward a stance of preparedness
and ethic of responsible action
Rdgs: Ch. 14, 15 (NT:PPP)
14
The process and role of “Neuro-Policy”: Are rules
sufficient?
Rdgs: Ch. 17 (NT:PPP)
15
Out of the box and “Out of the Cave”: Where might we be
going from here – a neo-Socratic perspective?
Rdgs: Ch. 18, Afterword (SPPP)
Giordano Benedikter. J. Evol Technol. (2012)
Shook, Giordano. Phil Ethics Hum Med (2012)
FINAL PAPER DUE
ACADEMIC RESPONSIBILITY
It is the student’s responsibility to familiarize themselves and comply with the Gallaudet
University Graduate Academic Integrity Policy, which can be found in the Gallaudet University
Undergraduate/Graduate Catalog or on the Gallaudet University website at:
http://catalog.gallaudet.edu/Catalog/Registration_and_Policies/Graduate_Policies/Academic_Int
egrity.html
OSWD ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATION POLICY
Students have the responsibility of formally requesting accommodation through the Office for
Students With Disabilities (OSWD) at the beginning of the semester. See,
http://oswd.gallaudet.edu/Student_Affairs/Student_Support_Services/Office_for_Students_with_
Disabilities/General_Information/Academic_Accommodations_Policy.html
For information on your rights under the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act please
see the OSWD site.
CHANGES TO THE SYLLABUS
Should items on this syllabus change, all students will be informed in writing.
Course Name: PEN 705 New Directions in Neuroethics
PEN 705 New Directions in Neuroethics
Course student Learning
Outcomes
1. Students will understand
that the educational
neuroscience practice is
governed by ethical and
professional standards.
2. Understand the complex
interrelationship among
science, technology, and
society
3. Recognize the societal
implications of developments
in PEN
Student Learning
Opportunities
Readings, class
discussion, and analysis
paper.
Readings, class
discussion, and analysis
paper.
Readings, class
discussion, and analysis
paper.
Assessment Method
Participation in class discussion
will be assessed by rubric The
final paper will be assessed with a
rubric (see appendix X for
rubrics.)
Participation in class discussion
will be assessed by rubric The
final paper will be assessed with a
rubric (see appendix X for
rubrics.)
Participation in class discussion
will be assessed by rubric The
final paper will be assessed with a
rubric (see appendix X for
rubrics.)
Gallaudet University Ph.D. Program in Educational Neuroscience
Rubric for Grading for Reading Discussions and Presentations
PLO
1 2 3 4 5
6
x x x x x
x
x x x x x
x
x x x x x
x
Adapted from Department of Interpretation
Gallaudet University Ph.D. Program in Educational Neuroscience
A Scored Rubric for Evaluating a Research Paper
Adapted from Department of Interpretation
Quoted from Linda Suskie’s (2004:146-147) Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide.
This quoted rubric was adapted with permission from a rubric developed by Sharon Glennen and Celia
Bassich-Zeren in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Towson University