To be or not to be neuroenhanced? Personal identity under siege in the age of ai-powered neurotechnology

Abstract

Recent advances in neurotechnology and AI have expanded the potential to influence brain function beyond traditional medical applications to the enhancement of healthy individuals. Growing investment in consumer neurotech and experimental BCIs signals a future where we may be able to substantially improve our cognitive and emotional capabilities – a prospect that raises profound ethical and legal concerns. Central to these concerns is the question of how neuroenhancement technologies may impact personal identity. The brain is often regarded not just as a biological system, but as the foundation of who we are – shaping our experiences, guiding our decisions and anchoring our sense of self. As individuals voluntarily engage with advanced technologies intended to modulate their cognition and emotions, they may disrupt their psychological continuity. This indicates far-reaching consequences, not just for the person undergoing neuroenhancement but for society at large. International bodies such as UNESCO and the Council of Europe have begun to discuss and address these risks, yet current governance frameworks remain ill-equipped for the complex and specific scenarios posed by non-therapeutic neuroenhancement. Against this backdrop, this thesis examines whether and to what extent limits should be placed on individual voluntary engagement with neuroenhancement technologies in order to safeguard personal identity. Using an interdisciplinary approach that incorporates philosophical, ethical and legal perspectives, this thesis seeks to contribute to the growing discourse on neurotechnology governance, advocating for a human-rights based and forward-looking approach.