School of Social Sciences and Technology, Department of Science, Technology and Society, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
School of Communication and Culture, Department of Digital Design and Information Studies, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2023 Feb 2;29(1):4. doi: 10.1007/s11948-022-00421-1.
Like many ethics debates surrounding emerging technologies, neuroethics is increasingly concerned with the private sector. Here, entrepreneurial visions and claims of how neurotechnology innovation will revolutionize society-from brain-computer-interfaces to neural enhancement and cognitive phenotyping-are confronted with public and policy concerns about the risks and ethical challenges related to such innovations. But while neuroethics frameworks have a longer track record in public sector research such as the U.S. BRAIN Initiative, much less is known about how businesses-and especially start-ups-address ethics in tech development. In this paper, we investigate how actors in the field frame and enact ethics as part of their innovative R&D processes and business models. Drawing on an empirical case study on direct-to-consumer (DTC) neurotechnology start-ups, we find that actors engage in careful boundary-work to anticipate and address public critique of their technologies, which allows them to delineate a manageable scope of their ethics integration. In particular, boundaries are drawn around four areas: the technology's actual capability, purpose, safety and evidence-base. By drawing such lines of demarcation, we suggest that start-ups make their visions of ethical neurotechnology in society more acceptable, plausible and desirable, favoring their innovations while at the same time assigning discrete responsibilities for ethics. These visions establish a link from the present into the future, mobilizing the latter as promissory place where a technology's benefits will materialize and to which certain ethical issues can be deferred. In turn, the present is constructed as a moment in which ethical engagement could be delegated to permissive regulatory standards and scientific authority. Our empirical tracing of the construction of 'ethical realities' in and by start-ups offers new inroads for ethics research and governance in tech industries beyond neurotechnology.
与许多新兴技术相关的伦理争议一样,神经伦理学越来越关注私营部门。在这里,企业家的愿景和声称,神经技术创新将如何从脑机接口到神经增强和认知表型改变社会,与公众和政策对这些创新相关风险和伦理挑战的担忧相冲突。但是,虽然神经伦理学框架在公共部门研究中(如美国大脑倡议)有更长的历史记录,但对于企业,特别是初创企业如何在技术开发中解决伦理问题,人们知之甚少。在本文中,我们研究了该领域的参与者如何将伦理作为其创新研发过程和商业模式的一部分来构建和执行。我们通过对直接面向消费者(DTC)神经技术初创企业的实证案例研究发现,参与者进行了仔细的边界工作,以预测和解决公众对其技术的批评,这使他们能够划定其伦理整合的可管理范围。特别是,在四个方面划定了界限:技术的实际能力、目的、安全性和证据基础。通过划定这些界限,我们认为初创企业使他们对社会中伦理神经技术的愿景更具可接受性、合理性和吸引力,有利于他们的创新,同时为伦理分配明确的责任。这些愿景从现在到未来建立了联系,将未来作为一个有希望的地方,在那里技术的好处将得以实现,并可以将某些伦理问题推迟到那里。反过来,现在被构建为一个可以将伦理参与委托给许可的监管标准和科学权威的时刻。我们对初创企业内部和通过初创企业构建“伦理现实”的实证追踪,为神经技术以外的技术产业中的伦理研究和治理提供了新的途径。