Keynote speakers

John Cabot University, IT
Homepage

Who Owns the Digital Data Generated by BCIs?

Abstract
In this talk, I will critically engage with the question of ownership of digital data produced by Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) through the philosophical framework of Euro-Transhumanism. I will explore whether ownership should reside with individual users, corporations, political institutions, or shared entities, and reflect on the implications of commodifying neural data for cognitive liberty. By examining this issue, I will emphasize the necessity of ethical pluralism and the development of regulatory frameworks that balance the protection of individual autonomy with the promotion of innovation. Furthermore, I will consider the possibility of utilizing digital data from BCIs as a form of payment for universal health insurance, addressing the broader intersection of digital data, personal identity, and emerging technologies.

Department of Psychology, Texas State University, USA
Homepage

Understanding the prevalence and outcomes of real-world cognitive enhancement

Abstract
Background: While cognitive enhancement using prescription stimulant medication is a long-standing focus of research and real-world experimentation, newer technologies (e.g., transcranial magnetic stimulation) offer the potential for non-medication interventions to improve cognition. Unlike stimulant medication, the availability, motives for use, and consequences of cognitive enhancement methods are understudied Methods: Systematic review of the literature, using the PubMed, PsycInfo, and Google Scholar databases. Results were searched using a set of terms (e.g., “neurocognitive”, “cognitive”, “enhancement”, 
“improvement”, “medication”, “stimulation”) in various combinations. Searches occurred in 2024, concluding in early November 2024. Results: A wealth of research evidence suggests that prescription stimulant misuse is common in young adults, especially those pursuing higher education. Such misuse is primarily for cognitive enhancement purposes, though a notable minority engage in misuse for recreational or euphoric purposes. Consequences of prescription stimulant misuse among those without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder are generally minor, as are any benefits, but include transition to illicit stimulant use and development of substance use disorder. Caffeine use as cognitive enhancement is also common, with debates about its effectiveness and limited evidence of harms. Other medications or supplements (e.g., melatonin) have only limited research on potential cognitive enhancement. Brain stimulation and brain-computer interface interventions are largely or exclusively limited to lab or clinical settings, and ongoing research is assessing their impact. Implications: Clear research evidence suggests that misuse of prescription stimulants for cognitive enhancement in healthy individuals (i.e., those without ADHD) has limited benefits with the potential for significant risks. Other interventions to enhance cognition are limited primarily to laboratory or clinical environments but warrant ongoing study and surveillance to understand how their use potentially expands and what the positive effects and negative consequences are of these interventions.

Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal (IRCM), CAN
Homepage

Cognitive enhancement, neuroethics, and imaginations of future wellbeing

Abstract
Contemporary societies and international institutions have been confronted with several waves of scientific and technological development. Each seems to provoke calls for renewed ethical discussions and public engagement. In the past decades, we can cite, for example, recombinant DNA, new reproductive technologies, genomics research, cloning, stem cells, neuroscience, social media, and artificial intelligence. Some of these developments (e.g., genomics) have perhaps not fully panned out in terms of anticipated disruptive effects while others (e.g., social media, AI) seem to have caught us socially and legally unprepared in terms of their concrete practical implications and ramifications. Looking back, and looking forward, how should our ethical imagination of the impact of technologies for cognitive enhancement on future wellbeing and flourishing be informed by what we can learn from the various ethical responses to which many of us have participated? In this talk, I will take a bird’s eye view to make a few observations to then fuel discussion and reflection in the group about how to approach cognitive enhancement. I will first provide background on the evolution of neuroethics and explain how the field has evolved to focus on neurotechnology. I will highlight some of the alternative visions and the implications of the focus on neurotechnology in the context of cognitive enhancement and beyond. Second, I will explain how imagination is central to an account of ethics focused on wellbeing and human flourishing. The exercise of imagination is an ethical, social, and political process, but despite – or perhaps because of – its importance, it remains a restrictive exercise in practice. Third, in this light, I come back to current debates about cognitive enhancement and formulate a series of big picture questions to help assess critically and constructively scholarship on cognitive enhancement, its contributions, and its future directions.