Judy Illes

Illes et al. focus on strategies and solutions to prevent neurotechnologies from being used to perpetuate colonial power dynamics.

The integration of Indigenous perspectives and knowledge with biomedical approaches in neurosciences can significantly broaden the understanding of the human brain and mind. Drawing upon the writings of Elders in Canada, we refer to this integration as Two-Eyed Seeing or Etuaptmumk. We discuss how Two-Eyed Seeing and other dual perspectives can bring both breadth of knowledge and humility to the development of research and clinical practices for brain health. In this forward-looking discussion, we include both traditional academic and non-academic traditions and the work of Indigenous scholars on methodologies, life, health, culture, language and history. To describe challenges and consider solutions, we offer broad strategies for allyship, humility and universalism and situate them in four specific examples pertaining to disability, suicide, migration and the environment. We further advance the power of Two-Eyed Seeing in the context of new considerations for communication and public engagement. Two-Eyed Seeing, per se, is only one approach, but as neuroscience becomes ever more global, inclusive and ethically proactive, it must universally see the world of brain and mental health through the eyes of both reductionism and holism.

A significant goal of neuroethics is to offer neuroscientists, health care providers, law- and policy-makers and others, ways of thinking and acting on matters relevant to brain health and conditions that affect the central nervous system. This goal and related calls to action have been derived from theory or empirical work and bring different levels of normative force. To bring the latter in particular to the foreground of discussion, we explored for this Policy Forum different calls to action as they are associated with chosen terminology, the definitions of terms, origins to which they are benchmarked, locations in text, and targeted audiences. We find variability on all of these factors as they appear in the original foundational journals for neuroethics: AJOB Neuroscience and Neuroethics. We recommend that for a field whose very existence relies on uptake of advice, better consistency of language will improve credibility, acceptance, and implementation.