Neurotechnology Hype, Biopolitics, and a Critique of the Injunction to Enjoy

Bibliographic Data

ID6437872
AuthorsMatthew Gildersleeve (0000-0002-9990-2471, The University of Queensland), Luca Valera (0000-0002-1693-396X, Universidad de Valladolid), Andrew Crowden (0000-0002-6525-1156, The University of Queensland)
Year2025
Volume9
Issue1
Pages76-97
Publication date2025-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Posthuman Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2471-4461 • E-ISSN: 2472-4513
PublisherThe Pennsylvania State University Press (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.5325/jpoststud.9.1.0076
OpenAlexW4414499097
LanguageEN
References cited67

This article discusses important considerations in the development and use of neurotechnology, particularly referring to brain–computer interfaces and neurofeedback, which some authors have claimed can create a posthuman subjectivity. It provides a psychoanalytic critique to outline the power over the mind and body that comes with neurotechnology and the need for a critical attitude to ensure that this power is recognized and attenuated. Furthermore, it details how ideology is relevant to neurotechnology and how it functions through fantasy, modern capitalism, and the superego injunction to enjoy! Specifically, the authors show that neurotechnology could feed into an ideology of biopolitics that may use human neurodata and neuromodulation as a more intimate, powerful way of managing individuals. This article also emphasizes the importance of symptomatic reading, which identifies lapses or omissions in neurotechnology narratives to unmask hidden meanings to better address the ethical dimensions of neurotechnology. This is particularly significant when considering research that demonstrates the phenomenon of neurohype, where laypeople, academics, clinicians, and others can get carried away with the promises of neuroscience

Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations · Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function

Tools

Open DOI