<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brain implants and cognitive side-effect trading</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/26/brain-implants-and-cognitive-side-effect-trading/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/26/brain-implants-and-cognitive-side-effect-trading/</link>
	<description>Neuroscience and psychology tricks to find out what&#039;s going on inside your brain.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:40:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: joseph lehmann</title>
		<link>http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/26/brain-implants-and-cognitive-side-effect-trading/#comment-5960</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[joseph lehmann]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 07:56:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/brain-implants-and-cognitive-side-effect-trading/#comment-5960</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vaughan,
Thank you for this interesting post. The article concludes with optimistic statements:
&quot;Yes, the technologies pose ethical challenges, but these are conceptually similar to those that
bioethicists have addressed for other realms
of therapy. Ethics is well prepared to deal with
the questions in parallel to and in cooperation
with the neuroscientific research.&quot;
Well, these statements are not proven anywhere in the article and one can easily claim that their opposites are true.
The article does not discuss the &quot;whole picture&quot; as Ms. Nattel wrote. In my mind, there is an always relevant question (as Kant wrote) &quot;what is a man?&quot; When technology changes our mind, who (or what) are we then?
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vaughan,<br />
Thank you for this interesting post. The article concludes with optimistic statements:<br />
&#8220;Yes, the technologies pose ethical challenges, but these are conceptually similar to those that<br />
bioethicists have addressed for other realms<br />
of therapy. Ethics is well prepared to deal with<br />
the questions in parallel to and in cooperation<br />
with the neuroscientific research.&#8221;<br />
Well, these statements are not proven anywhere in the article and one can easily claim that their opposites are true.<br />
The article does not discuss the &#8220;whole picture&#8221; as Ms. Nattel wrote. In my mind, there is an always relevant question (as Kant wrote) &#8220;what is a man?&#8221; When technology changes our mind, who (or what) are we then?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lilian Nattel</title>
		<link>http://mindhacks.com/2009/02/26/brain-implants-and-cognitive-side-effect-trading/#comment-5959</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lilian Nattel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:05:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mindhacksblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/brain-implants-and-cognitive-side-effect-trading/#comment-5959</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s a refreshing change to hear about considering the whole picture and balancing side effects against benefits.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a refreshing change to hear about considering the whole picture and balancing side effects against benefits.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

