On the Significance of the Identity Debate in DBS and the Need of an Inclusive Research Agenda. A Reply to Gilbert, Viana and Ineichen

Gilbert et al. (Neuroethics, 2018) argue that the concerns about the influence of Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) on - as they lump together - personality, identity, agency, autonomy, authenticity and the self (PIAAAS) are due to an ethics hype. They argue that there is only a small empirical base for an extended ethics debate. We will critically examine their claims and argue that Gilbert and colleagues do not show that the identity debate in DBS is a bubble, they in fact give very little evidence for that. Rather they show the challenges of doing research in a field that is stretched out over multiple disciplines. In that sense their paper is an important starting point for a discussion on methodology and offers valuable lessons for a future research agenda.

Automated summary

Gilbert et al. argue that concerns about the impact of DBS on PIAAAS are due to an ethics hype, but they fail to prove that the identity debate is just a bubble and provide little evidence to support this view. Their study highlights the challenges of conducting research in interdisciplinary fields, offering valuable lessons for future research agendas.