21 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Historical, Ethical, and Prospective Views of Neuroscience & the Military, December 4, 2006
This review is from: Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense (Hardcover)
Basic science has always had military applications, but only relatively recently has the defense industry actively funded and solicited scientists to optimize war. In "Mind Wars," Jonathan Moreno analyzes the military's intense interest in modern neuroscience from historical, scientific, and ethical perspectives.
A famous historical example of military funding basic science is the British intelligence services' employment of thousands of mathematicians - including artificial intelligence pioneer Alan Turing - to decipher the Enigma encryption system during World War II. Both the simultaneous development of the ENIAC computer and the role of Vannevar Bush (another artificial intelligence pioneer) as Roosevelt's science advisor helped to solidified the defense industry's interest in advanced mathematics and computer science.
Far less famous is the long-standing interest of the military in the behavioral sciences, which Jonathan Moreno carefully traces back to its roots in the psychological analyses of American soldiers in the 1950s to improve training and recruiting techniques. Moreno estimates that the military - including KUBARK, the codename for what would come to be known as the CIA - was the real source of nearly all federal funding for 1950's behavioral sciences. More than a third of American research psychologists were funded through such channels (frequently without their knowledge). This startling conclusion is validated by the involvement of several 1950's psychologists in the development of interrogation techniques (involving psychological torture and humiliation) as well as even by contemporary psychology's involvement in the Abu Ghraib scandal (and refusal by the American Psychological Association to critcize such practices).
After this historical introduction, "Mind Wars" turns its focus to the potential military applications of neuroscience - a field that represents the convergence of medical, computer and behavioral science, into each of which the military has poured enormous sums for decades. Moreno covers several existing programs, including the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) Augmented Cognition (AugCog) and Preventing Sleep Deprivation (PSD) programs, involving the use of "smart drugs" like modafinil and CX717, as well as the development of nonlethal weapons such as hypersonic "high intensity directed acoustics" or microwave-radiating "active denial systems." Moreno also cautiously discusses some of the military's future directions, such as "rapid onset brain-targeted bioweapons," with a careful eye towards what is technically feasible and what is merely hype.
In what is probably the best part of "Mind Wars" (and unexpectedly so, at least for me), Moreno discusses the ethical implications of neuroscience's involvement with the military. Moreno admits that he is no "loose cannon" - indeed, he has given invited testimony to Congress, has served on two presidential ethics commissions, and is an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security. Nonethelesss his analysis is incredibly even-handed, bringing up topics like the philosophy of "dual use" for military science, the history of the practice of informed consent (which actually began in the military decades before it was used in academia), and the privacy implications of new neurotechnology.
The book itself is written in a highly conversational tone, filled with interesting and relevant personal anecdotes (of which Moreno has many; his father was a psychiatrist involved in the military testing of LSD). Moreno's sources are well cited, where possible: many of his government contacts declined to be identified by name.
"Mind Wars" will likely be enjoyed by both neuroscientists, psychologists, and lay people alike, although experts are likely to be familiar with most of the existing technologies and programs that Moreno reviews. On the other hand, the historical and ethical treatment of military neuroscience are the most timeless contributions of "Mind Wars" to this debate, and will be interesting to anyone with an interest in science and its applications.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Any concerned with democracy, warfare or connections between science and politics must read this., December 12, 2006
This review is from: Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense (Hardcover)
MIND WARS: BRAIN RESEARCH AND NATIONAL DEFENSE draws some important connections between psychological study and military objective, making it a recommended pick for both military and psychology collections at the college level. Here is a unique presentation of connections between natural security objectives and brain research, documenting ways in which U.S. security forces seek to manipulate the human nervous system to favor warriors and disrupt enemies. From virus-transported molecules called 'neuroweapons' to drugs which repress violent tendencies, neuroscience projects offer deadly potentials influencing not just battlefield applications, but civilians and freedom as well. Any concerned with democracy, warfare or connections between science and politics must read this.
Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
7 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Lots of material for public discussion of neuroethics, March 8, 2007
This review is from: Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense (Hardcover)
This is a great book, as long as you think of it as a book for laypeople, to get up to speed on ethical issues revolving around neuroscience research, especially as they relate to US military efforts. It is well written in a fairly conversational tone that keeps the reader interested. I was disappointed that, although it appeared to me at first to be an objective, academic book, it isn't really. I was misled because Moreno is an endowed professor of biomedical ethics, and there are 9 pages of "Sources" and an index. The trouble is that Moreno failed to link many of his points, facts, quotes, and opinions to any of the written sources; there are no citation numbers or other ways (except when he mentions names, which he often doesn't or can't) to trace something he said to the source. Given the highly speculative and controversial nature of the subject matter and how important it is to know where it came from, this would be inexcusable for an academic book. He might get 4.5 stars for his 2nd edition if he fixes this oversight.
Disclaimer: I am a neuroscientist and a pacifist. I wish Moreno had been clear about _his_ position, but we had to guess until p. 136 (out of 184), where he finally admits he finds himself "squarely in the middle" between Fukuyama's ("Our Posthuman Future") dread of all things new and the Futurists' transhumanism. I prefer Ramez Naam's stance, admitting often in his excellent book "More than human" that we ought to embrace, not fear, our ability to change humanity. Moreno's fence-straddling in many ways is a good thing; it allowed him to discuss both sides of a number of arguments rationally and in some detail. As a neuroscience insider (who does not accept military funding), I agree with him that too many researchers deny or ignore the ethical implications of their research.
Moreno's book is an important follow-up to Naam's, since Naam said we need to begin debating and planning for our transhuman future, and Moreno does a fine job of seriously beginning or expanding the parts of that discussion involving the nervous system. His final recommendation is that national committees be formed to make these debates more public. I hope that happens.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No