Search

Creativity is the ability to come up with new and original solutions to problems. It is characterized along a dipole spectrum, with the opposing ends defined as convergent and divergent thinking. Previous studies have provided evidence that various cognitive functions and insight into non-verbal problems can be enhanced using non-invasive brain stimulation. The aim of this pilot study was to investigate whether convergent and divergent thinking, as well as insight, can be modulated by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the anterior temporal lobe (ATL). Bilateral tDCS (1.5 mA, 20 minutes) was used to modulate activity of the right (AR tDCS) and the left (AL tDCS) ATL. Twenty-one participants performed a divergent thinking test (DTT) during tDCS, while a Remote Associates Task (RAT) was administered before and after tDCS to assess convergent thinking. A control experiment, using a Simple Reaction Time (SRT) Task, was conducted in 10 subjects before and after ATL tDCS in order to investigate whether its effects reflect attention or motor effects on the dominant hand. Results from this preliminary study showed that AL tDCS reduced RAT reaction times (RTs) by 20%. Both AL and AR tDCS did not change RAT accuracy, or the DTT total or sub-item scores. No differences were found in the SRT task after either AL or AR tDCS. These findings suggest that left but not right ATL is involved in convergent thinking. Conversely, both left and right temporal cortex tDCS-induced excitability changes failed to modulate divergent thinking. Limitations are discussed.

The quarantine model, recently proposed by Pereboom and Caruso, is one of the most influential models developed to date in the context of criminal justice. The quarantine model challenges the very idea of criminal punishment and asserts that nobody deserves punishment on a fundamental level. Instead, in order to deal with offenders, it proposes a series of incapacitation measures based on public safety concerns. In this article, we examine several objections to the quarantine model that demonstrate how, in our view, it can be improved. These mainly pertain to (2.1) the difficulty of reliably identifying dangerous individuals and consequently the need to base confinement decisions on probability, and (2.2) the potential for the quarantine model not to properly deter certain crimes. Three additional objections are raised with respect to (3.1) the rights that are potentially suppressed in the quarantine model; (3.2) the role of “genetic justice”; and (3.3) the difficulty it faces accommodating reasons-responsiveness. Whereas these objections do not constitute knock-down arguments against the quarantine model, they highlight issues that invite closer scrutiny, at least if it is to be considered as a credible framework for the development of viable policies in criminal justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human brain organoids (HBOs) are three-dimensional biological entities grown in the laboratory in order to recapitulate the structure and functions of the adult human brain. They can be taken to be novel living entities for their specific features and uses. As a contribution to the ongoing discussion on the use of HBOs, the authors identify three sets of reasons for moral concern. The first set of reasons regards the potential emergence of sentience/consciousness in HBOs that would endow them with a moral status whose perimeter should be established. The second set of moral concerns has to do with an analogy with artificial womb technology. The technical realization of processes that are typically connected to the physiology of the human body can create a manipulatory and instrumental attitude that can undermine the protection of what is human. The third set concerns the new frontiers of biocomputing and the creation of chimeras. As far as the new frontier of organoid intelligence is concerned, it is the close relationship of humans with new interfaces having biological components capable of mimicking memory and cognition that raises ethical issues. As far as chimeras are concerned, it is the humanization of nonhuman animals that is worthy of close moral scrutiny. A detailed description of these ethical issues is provided to contribute to the construction of a regulative framework that can guide decisions when considering research in the field of HBOs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]