Suppr超能文献

脑组织移植会改变个人身份吗?一些“标准”论点的不足之处。

Do brain tissue transplants alter personal identity? Inadequacies of some "standard" arguments.

作者信息

Northoff G

机构信息

Psychiatry Department, University of Frankfurt, Germany.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 1996 Jun;22(3):174-80. doi: 10.1136/jme.22.3.174.

Abstract

Currently, brain tissue transplantations are being developed as a clinical-therapeutic tool in neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's or Alzheimer's disease. From an ethical point of view, distinguishing between the preservation and an alteration of personal identity seems to be central to determining the scope for further application of brain tissue transplantation therapy. The purpose of this article is to review "standard" arguments which are used on the one hand by proponents to prove preservation of personal identity and by opponents on the other hand to prove that brain tissue transplantation results in an altered personal identity. Proponents and opponents are shown to use the same arguments, albeit with different presuppositions. These presuppositions concern the meaning of the term "identity", either numerical or qualitative, the definition of brain identity, either structurally or functionally, and the relationship between mental states, psychological functions and neurophysiological properties as criteria for personal identity. Furthermore the respective neurophysiological, clinical and philosophical evidence for the different presuppositions are discussed. It is concluded that evaluation of personal identity in brain tissue transplantation should not only rely on the "standard" arguments but, additionally, neurophysiological, clinical and philosophical implications should be discussed.

摘要

目前,脑组织移植正在被开发为一种针对帕金森氏症或阿尔茨海默氏症等神经退行性疾病的临床治疗工具。从伦理角度来看,区分个人身份的保存与改变似乎是确定脑组织移植疗法进一步应用范围的核心。本文的目的是回顾“标准”论点,一方面支持者用这些论点来证明个人身份的保存,另一方面反对者用这些论点来证明脑组织移植会导致个人身份的改变。结果表明,支持者和反对者使用的是相同的论点,尽管前提不同。这些前提涉及“身份”一词的含义,无论是数字上的还是质的,涉及脑身份的定义,无论是结构上的还是功能上的,还涉及心理状态、心理功能和神经生理特性之间的关系,将其作为个人身份的标准。此外,还讨论了不同前提各自的神经生理、临床和哲学证据。得出的结论是,对脑组织移植中个人身份的评估不应仅依赖于“标准”论点,此外,还应讨论神经生理、临床和哲学方面的影响。

相似文献

5
Neural fetal tissue transplants: old and new issues.
Zygon. 1996 Dec;31(4):615-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9744.1996.tb00953.x.
7
Why let people die?为什么任由人们死去?
J Med Ethics. 1986 Jun;12(2):83-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.12.2.83.
8
Ethics of 'brain transplants'.
Br J Psychiatry. 1990 Oct;157:625. doi: 10.1192/s0007125000140991.

引用本文的文献

1
Identity change and informed consent.身份变更与知情同意。
J Med Ethics. 2017 Jun;43(6):384-390. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2016-103684. Epub 2017 Mar 20.
2
Saving a life but losing the patient.救人一命,却失去了病人。
Theor Med Bioeth. 2013 Dec;34(6):479-98. doi: 10.1007/s11017-013-9273-1.
4
Implant ethics.植入伦理学
J Med Ethics. 2005 Sep;31(9):519-25. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.009803.
5
[Neuroethics--a future discipline?].[神经伦理学——一门未来的学科?]
Nervenarzt. 2006 Jan;77(1):5-11. doi: 10.1007/s00115-005-1895-8.

本文引用的文献

1
Brain death and personal identity.
Philos Public Aff. 1980 Winter;9(2):105-33.
2
Identity and the ethics of gene therapy.
Bioethics. 1993 Jan;7(1):27-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1993.tb00269.x.
3
Neurosurgical horizons in Parkinson's disease.帕金森病的神经外科治疗前景
Neurology. 1993 Jan;43(1):1-7. doi: 10.1212/wnl.43.1_part_1.1.
7
Neuropsychiatry . . . again.
Arch Neurol. 1986 Apr;43(4):325-7. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1986.00520040013010.
8
Brain transplants: myth or monster?
Br J Psychiatry. 1990 Aug;157:302. doi: 10.1192/bjp.157.2.302b.
9
Ethics of 'brain transplants'.
Br J Psychiatry. 1990 Oct;157:625. doi: 10.1192/s0007125000140991.
10
Comments on brain tissue transplantation without immunosuppression.
Arch Neurol. 1991 Mar;48(3):259-62. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1991.00530150027010.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验