D.D. Schmorrow and C.M. Fidopiastis (Eds.): FAC 2011, HCII 2011, LNAI 6780, pp. 39–45, 2011. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011 Neurological Advances and Ethical/Legal Conundrums: Lessons from History Cheryl Erwin Assistant Professor and Director, Medical Humanities Certificate Program University of Texas Medical School at Houston 6431 Fannin St., JJL 410, Houston, Texas 77030, USA Cheryl.erwin@uth.tmc.ed, Cheryl.erwin@ttu.edu Abstract. The scientific advances in the neurosciences are exciting and promise to advance our understanding of the human mind. The ethical and legal issues raised by neuroscience are distinctive but they are not unique to the twenty-first century. The ethical issues raised by these technologies deserve attention even while the science is in development. History teaches us to reflect on our humanity using insights from many disciplines and many times. Keywords: Neuroethics, neurolaw, neuroprivacy, neuropolicy, research ethics, regulation of emerging technologies. 1 Introduction The neurosciences are quickly outstripping our ability to fully assign human meaning to the very subject of our inquiry. What does it mean to say that we are mapping the mind? What does the map direct to our attention? How do we understand the meaning of what a mind is, or what it is capable of becoming? When we then image the mind, do we really understand fully how these images may be utilized for good or ill in society? How might we promote the good and dissuade the ill uses of our knowledge? While the questions I pose are intriguing, they are not unique to the field of twenty first century cognitive neuroscience. A review of the issues we have confronted with prior neurotechnologies brings out important features that we may wish to consider and continue in conversation with one another. As an academic who works at the intersection of law-science-medicine, I am often asked why my law students see the world so differently from my medical students, and again differently from the science students in my ethics courses. While there are no simple answers, there are answers that are simply wrong. These wrong, and simple, answers often involve misattribution of divisions between “us” and “them”. It is more complex, but more accurate to see the enterprise of science and society as one that necessarily involves all of us: inclusive, disparate, but interconnected and interdependent at the same time. 1.1 Historical Trends in Scientific Ethics and Law It is often possible to see from a distance what seems confusing at close range. The distance of time allows history to offer such a perspective.