MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Emergentism at the Crossroads of Philosophy, Neurotechnology, and the Enhancement Debate

2009· book-chapter· en· W1556846369 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Racine, Judy Illes

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativePsychological interventionEngineering ethicsEpistemologyNeuroethicsPsychologySociologyEngineeringPhilosophyNeurosciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines the implications of emergentism for research in philosophy and neurotechnology and evaluates the capabilities of brain-machine interfaces (BMI) to enhance brain function. It argues that the emergentist approach, for which reduction is necessary but insufficient to understand the higher level properties of the self, provides the strongest option for guiding the present ethical debate concerning BMI. The article suggests that BMI constitutes groundbreaking therapeutic interventions because it leads to a more complete ethical analysis that includes scientific, normative, and cultural considerations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsFrench-language works237,207