- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Response to open Peer commentaries on "neuroethics and national security"
Turhan Canli, Susan Brandon, William Casebeer, Philip J. Crowley, Don DuRousseau, Henry T. Greely & Alvaro Pascual-Leones
American Journal of Bioethics 7 (5):W1 – W3 (2007)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Neuroethics: A New Way of Doing Ethics”.Neil Levy - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 2 (2):W1-W4.
Responses to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Subjective Brain, Identity, and Neuroethics”.Grant R. Gillett - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (9):1-4.
Autonomy is Political, Pragmatic, and Postmetaphysical: A Reply to Open Peer Commentaries on “Autonomy in Neuroethics”.Veljko Dubljević - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 7 (4):W1-W3.
Defining the Scope and Improving the Quality of Clinical Research Ethics Consultation: Response to Open Peer Commentaries About the National Collaborative.Kathryn M. Porter, Marion Danis, Holly A. Taylor, Mildred K. Cho & Benjamin S. Wilfond - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (2):13-15.
An Unbiased Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Does Consent Bias Research?”.Mark A. Rothstein & Abigail B. Shoben - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (4):W1 - W4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Moral Hazard in Pediatrics”.Donald Brunnquell & Christopher M. Michaelson - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (8):3-4.
Nonmaleficence, Nondisclosure, and Nocebo: Response to Open Peer Commentaries.John T. Fortunato, Jason Adam Wasserman & Daniel Londyn Menkes - 2017 - American Journal of Bioethics 17 (7):4-5.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “How to Do Research Fairly in an Unjust World”.Angela J. Ballantyne - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):4-6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Surrogate Decision Making in the Internet Age”.Jessica Berg - 2012 - American Journal of Bioethics 12 (10):W1-W2.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
129 (#350,423)
6 months
8 (#1,303,858)
2009-01-28
Downloads
129 (#350,423)
6 months
8 (#1,303,858)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
What is Medical Ethics Consultation?Giles R. Scofield - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (1):95-118.
References found in this work
National Security.Daniel Imhoff & Christina Badaracoo - 2019 - In Daniel Imhoff & Christina Badaracoo, The Farm Bill: A Citizen’s Guide. Washington, DC: Island Press/Center for Resource Economics. pp. 175-180.
Against the use of medical technologies for military or national security interests.Leah Rosenberg & Eric Gehrie - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (5):22 – 24.
Neuroethics and human rights.Luis Justo & Fabiana Erazun - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (5):16 – 18.
Ethical intelligence from neuroscience: Is it possible?John Lunstroth & Jan Goldman - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (5):18 – 20.
Total Information Awareness–Forgotten But Not Gone: Lessons for Neuroethics.Sheri Alpert - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (5):24 – 26.
Try MATCHA Writer if you're interested in citing directly from PhilPapers and certifying your authorship.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation