Effaced Enigmata.

Area of Science:

• Neuroscience
• Bioethics
• Philosophy of Mind

Background:

• Severe head or brain injuries present unique challenges for clinical neuroscientists.
• Assessing cognitive and neurological function objectively can make it difficult to recognize patients' membership in the moral community.
• Patients with severe brain injuries are often treated as if they require rescue, despite uncertainty about their potential for recovery.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore the ethical considerations in the care of patients with severe head or brain injuries.
• To examine the role of objective assessment versus subjective connection in patient care.
• To highlight the ethical priority over neuroscience in determining the value of a patient's life.

Main Methods:

• The study emphasizes the need to "bracket" objective assessment methods.
• It advocates for reconnecting with patients on a human level.
• It involves considering the ethical implications of restorative journeys and the value of life.

Main Results:

• The existence of patients as "enigmata-beings" is called into question due to uncertainty about their potential for self-revelation through social and personal functions.
• The restorative journey for patients with severe brain injuries is fraught with existential questions about the possibility of a meaningful life.
• Neuroscience alone cannot answer critical ethical questions regarding the value of life and commitment to care.

Conclusions:

• Ethics must take priority over neuroscience in the care of patients with severe brain injuries.
• The ethical response to such patients is paramount and determines the course of care.
• Understanding the human being at the heart of care reveals the value of every individual and the nature of the moral community.