Do we need regulation for coming brain augmentation technologies?

If you could permanently change your brain to work better, would you? Or, maybe more importantly, would you have the right to?

Over at The Atlantic, there’s an excellent rundown of think-tank the Institute for the Future’s forecasts for the next 10 years, but one of the most fascinating is the idea of a “Magna Cortica”: a document that would legally protect the right to cognitive enhancement. Mood pills, brain stimulation, genetic modification — what should we be allowed to do to ourselves?

Institute for the Future distinguished fellow Jamais Cascio drew up this rough list:

1. The right to self-knowledge

2. The right to self-modification

3. The right to refuse modification

4. The right to modify/refuse to modify your children

5. The right to know who has been modified

Read the full, original story: Do We Need A ‘Magna Cortica’ For Brain Rights?

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}
screenshot at  pm

Are pesticide residues on food something to worry about?

In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring drew attention to pesticides and their possible dangers to humans, birds, mammals and the ...
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.