Mind Wars: Brain Research and National Defense

by Jonathan D. Moreno

Book Overview

Minority Report meets Dr. Strangelove in the true story of how neuroscience and related technologies are shaping national defense. This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1932594167
• ISBN13: 9781932594164
• Release Date: November 2006
• Publisher: Dana Press
• Length: 210 Pages
• Weight: 1.24 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 6.1" x 9.3"

Customer Reviews

Strongly Recommend

I just started reading this book, but I'm very interested in the topic and impressed by the credentials of the author. What I have read so far makes me want to get some security clearance and start experimenting on live human brains. Fun!

The Title Says it All, Mind Wars...a study in Ponerology?

I think the use of WAR in the title by Moreno,especially having read his earlier book Undue Risk: Secret State Experiments on Humans and the concerns it raises are valid, and results from the use of phrases from the Transhumanists like "WE ought to embrace", "OUR ability to change humanity", "WE need to begin debating and planning for OUR transhuman future". A party of WE and OUR creates an Interest Group, and thus an Issue. By involving NGO's, professional associations, and governments, all of which have financial and power interests at stake, and by using media through publicity campaigns, they legitimize their issue by making their Issue, everybody's issue. Then they propose their solution, which was created in Think Tanks fifty years ago, and impose it as Public Policy upon everybody else. This process they call GOVERNANCE. This is actually a process of herding the population like a trail driver and cattle to a destination that they have determined. Thus this is the true meaning of the term WE when it is used inclusively by them. I merely ask, as in the old Lone Ranger joke, where Tonto says "What You mean WE Paleface?" The reality is, that at the highest levels of participation and decision making, the scientific and political "committees" always consist of "experts", who are incapable of admitting of a binding ethical obligation to refrain from imposing policies that they favor upon others who don't want them. Yet they artfully arrange things so that everyone is forced to subsidize their agendas through tax-supported initiatives while unaware of it. They can always rationalize why thisw is necessary. After sufficient marketing, publicity campaigns and brainwashing which they call the "democratic process", their agenda is moved forward. Vocal opponents are often portrayed as traditionalists, conservatives, backward or as ignorant obstructionists...even diseased and defective, simply because they want to be left alone or are overall happy enough without being manipulated. Terms like "We", and "Our" have always meant the "few, self-appointed "experts", the government and Foundation financed oligarchies, if you will, with their far reaching scientifically designed agendas. The "natural person" as opposed to some contrived invention called a "trans-human", as the these "experts" envision themselves to be someday, has a right to be left unmolested by these establishment psychopaths who are determined to drive them like herds to market, and cram an agenda of political domination disguised as scientific "advancements" down their throat. Who gets to decide on which people get to benefit from these advances and which are denied once THEY are in control of it? Is it Dr. Mengele's Fan Club? The Militarists? Or our family Doctors, who are held hostage by this corrupt system? What are their qualifications? Will everyone benefit equally? Do those who view science as a means to dominate and control the weaker and less aggressive in soci

Interesting analysis of military uses of brain research

This is an intriguing but speculative volume exploring the possible national defense uses of human brain research. The author, Jonathan Moreno, states his fundamental hypothesis. The idea behind this book (page 3): ". . .if national security agencies had so much interest in how the relatively primitive brain science of the 1950s and 1960s [e.g., testing the effects of LSD] could help find ways to gain a national security edge, surely they must be at least as interested today, when neuroscience is perhaps the fastest growing scientific field, both in terms of numbers of scientists and knowledge being gained." The author wonders at the lack of "ethical discussion among neuroscientists on the national security applications of their work" (page 5). Moreno speculates about a number of possible links between brain research and national security. Among possible applications: (a) How to better interrogate possible intelligence sources; (b) brainwashing/mind control; (c) improving the performance of our own troops (e.g., how to deal with fatigue); (d) nonlethal weapons. He concludes the book with a chapter entitled "Toward an ethics of neurosecurity," in which he argues that we need to explore the ethics of possible applications of brain research for national security. He also notes that (page 183) "We should be able to learn and apply the lessons of the new brain science for peaceful purposes. . . . The fields of conflict resolution and peace studies could enrich and be enriched by information from the neurosciences." The arguments in the book tend to be speculative. The grounding of the argument is not always secure. However, the book does stimulate thinking about a cutting edge issue in application of contemporary science to national security. In that context, this book is useful reading.

Any concerned with democracy, warfare or connections between science and politics must read this.

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

Historical, Ethical, and Prospective Views of Neuroscience & the Military

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 th