Between Neuroskepticism and Neurogullibility - Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense - page 221

(Schein 2010). At the surface is the level of neuro-artifacts. Neuro-artifacts include the
visible products of neuroscience. The most important point to be made about this level
of neurotechnology is that it is both easy to observe and very difficult to decipher.
In other words, observers can describe what they see and feel, but cannot reconstruct
from that alone what those things mean in the given group, or whether they even
reflect important underlying assumptions. It may be especially dangerous to try to
infer the deeper assumptions from neuro-artifacts alone, because one's interpretations
will inevitably be projections of one's own feelings and reactions (Schein 2010).
Analyzing a deeper level of neurotechnology, all artifacts that humanity produces
ultimately reflect someone's original beliefs and values, their sense of what ought to
be, as distinct from what actually is. When a group is first formed or first faces a new
task, issue, or problem, the first solutions proposed characteristically reflect some
individual's (or particular group of individuals') assumptions about what is right or
wrong, and what will work or not work. Beliefs and values that emerge at this con-
scious level will predict much of the behavior that can be observed at the artifacts'
level. If the espoused beliefs and values are reasonably congruent with the underly-
ing assumptions, then the articulation of those values into an operating philosophy
can indeed be helpful in bringing the group together, serving as a source of identity,
and solidifying a core mission. But in analyzing beliefs and values, one must dis-
criminate carefully between those that are congruent with underlying assumptions
and those that are, in effect, either rationalizations or mere aspirations for the future.
Often, such beliefs and values are so abstract that they can be mutually contradic-
tory, as when a company claims to be equally concerned about stockholders, employ-
ees, and customers, or when it claims both highest quality and lowest cost. Espoused
beliefs and values often leave large areas of behavior unexplained, generating a feel-
ing that we understand a piece of the culture, but still do not have the culture as such
in hand. To access deeper levels of understanding, to decipher the pattern, and to
predict future behavior correctly, it becomes important to more fully understand the
category of basic underlying assumptions (Schein 2010).
Basic assumptions, in the sense in which I want to define that concept, have
become so taken for granted that one finds little variation within a social unit. This
degree of consensus results from repeated success in implementing certain beliefs
and values, as previously described. In fact, if a basic assumption comes to be
strongly held in a group, members will find behavior based on any other premise to
be almost inconceivable (Schein 2010). This type of multileveled analysis of neuro-
technology—operating at the level of its artifacts, the level of its espoused beliefs
and values, and the level of its basic underlying assumptions—illustrates the potency
of implicit, unconscious assumptions and shows that such assumptions often deal
with fundamental aspects of life: the nature of time and space, human nature and
human activities, the nature of truth and how it is discovered and revealed, ways
for individuals and the group to relate to each other, and the relative (if not chang-
ing) roles and importance of work, family, and self-development (Ihde 2009; Schein
2010; Benanti 2012b). Neurotechnology must be studied at each and all of these
three. If one does not examine and intuit the pattern of basic assumptions that may
be operating, one will not know how to correctly interpret the artifacts or recognize
how much credence to give to the articulated values. In other words, the “essence” of