The Sociology of Neuroethics: Expectational Discourses and the Rise of a New Discipline Caragh Brosnan* Centre for Biomedicine & Society, King’s College London Abstract The sudden emergence of the discipline ‘neuroethics’ is an intriguing event from the perspective of the sociologies of medicine, science and bioethics. Despite calls for greater social science engagement with neuroethics, it has so far received little attention. So that sociologists might con- sider how to engage with the field, and in order to simultaneously contribute towards a sociology of neuroethics, this paper explores neuroethics’ disciplinary identity via a critical analysis of litera- ture defining neuroethics’ scope and role. Drawing on the sociologies of bioethics and expecta- tions, I argue that in setting the neuroethical agenda, neuroethicists construct expectations about the future of neuroscience. In doing so, they align themselves with neuroscience, rather than maintaining a critical distance. Similar critiques have been made of bioethics, but in its efforts to distinguish itself from bioethics, neuroethics appears to exacerbate many of the attributes which sociologists have found problematic. This reinforces the need for critical social science perspectives to inform neuroethics, and also shows how neuroethics is potentially an interesting area of empiri- cal study for sociology. However, the paper concludes by calling for critical reflexivity in sociol- ogy’s engagement with neuroethics, in light of recent debates surrounding the relationship between social science, bioethics, bioscience and expectations. Introduction The sudden emergence of the new discipline ‘neuroethics’, coinciding with increasing hype surrounding the potential applications of neuroscience, is an intriguing event from the perspective of the sociologies of medicine, science and bioethics. Tracing its own ori- gins to a 2002 conference in San Francisco (‘Neuroethics: mapping the field’) (Giordano 2010; Illes and Bird 2006; Marcus 2002), neuroethics concerns itself with the ethics of neuroscientific developments and with how such developments may shed light on the neurobiological basis of morality. Topics neuroethicists are discussing include the ethical and legal implications of brain imaging, cognitive enhancement, memory manipulation, psychopharmacology, brain-computer interfaces, neurogenetics, neurotransplantation and other neurological therapies and what such technologies can reveal about the nature of morality, rationality, free will, consciousness, personality, empathy and the self. Neuro- ethics’ 8-year life has seen the launch of two new journals (Neuroethics and American Jour- nal of Bioethics – Neuroscience), the founding of the Neuroethics Society and several academic neuroethics centres, the publication of at least nine books devoted to it, as well as special journal issues and numerous conferences. A search for ‘neuroethic*’ in the ISI Web of Knowledge database reveals a steady increase in output, rising from four papers published in 2002 to 63 papers published in 2009. Although sociologists are paying increasing attention to bioethics, neuroethics’ dramatic burst onto the scene has so far received little sociological analysis. Raymond De Vries Sociology Compass 5/4 (2011): 287–297, 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00365.x ª 2011 The Author Sociology Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd