The New York Times has an article discussing neuroscientist Michael Gazzinaga's new book on that hot topic: neuroethics. Although "Gazzaniga is less interested in delivering verdicts on bioethical quandries -- should we clone? tinker with our babies' I.Q.? -- than in untangling how we arrive at moral and ethical judgments in the first place." Which is maybe more to the point. All very well pondering on the ethics of "smart pills", but if they're never going to do more than give users a slight advantage, then the ethical quandary is surely not as great. Ditto if, realistically, we're never going to be able to make true "designer babies", because there is, after all, rather more to a person than a bunch of genes. We are what we're made, but genes ain't the only thing making us!

(By the way, you need to register to read the New York Times. If you don't want to do this, let me put in a plug for BugMeNot -- a service that allows you to bypass these pesky registrations!)