Engaging Neuroethical Issues Generated by the Use of Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense - Neurotechnology in National Security and Defense - page 271

such RCR training does not teach or support the development of ethical
reasoning). At this level, ethical reasoning skills would tend to be limited
to remembering, understanding, or summarizing ethical facts and concepts
(Tractenberg et al. 2013).
Beginner . An apprentice who has increasing opportunities to exhibit ethical
reasoning KSAs. This individual requires formative and formal oversight
as their awareness of the KSAs (and how/when to employ them) grows. The
beginner has had some exposure to the reasoning KSAs, but their reasoning
would tend to be at a low level, and their work would be expected to reflect
greater insight and depth than the novice.
Journeyman . Professionals (from any field) who exhibit all ethical reasoning
KSAs, clearly show proficiency in ethical reasoning, and seek new opportu-
nities to reinforce less well-developed skills. Their work represents under-
standing, summarization, and depth that permit analysis and/or prediction
of ethical outcomes to the extent necessary and sufficient to function
independently.
Proicient . Ethical reasoners (at the Journeyman level) who consistently
exhibit all of the KSAs and who are capable and viable participants in ethi-
cal reasoning training activities, including development and evaluation. The
output of the “proficient” reasoner represents functioning at the highest
level of sophistication. Moreover, as originally conceptualized, the profi-
cient individual is recognized by their documented experience and ability to
capably mentor less senior/proficient reasoners, and their abilities to evaluate
and remediate the reasoning skills exhibited in less-proficient reasoners and
trainees.
The ethical reasoning skills in the MR-ER are foundational for engaging ethical chal-
lenges generally—and are neither topic nor discipline specific. This combination of rea-
soning skills and the developmental trajectory (with concretely described performance
at each level) provides a new view of ethics training, competence, and assessment—as
preparation for individuals to meaningfully engage evolving challenges, like NELSI
in NSID, without having to be retrained for specific “fields” or “issues.” Because ethi-
cal reasoning is a learnable, improvable skill set, achievement and criteria for candi-
dacy or selection to groups or bodies charged with decision making around NELSI
can be documented. Because ethical reasoning is a high level but generic skill set, the
reasoner will be able to identify and analyze gaps in their own prerequisite knowledge
and develop compensatory strategies and/or tactics—including, but not limited to find-
ing individuals with the ethical reasoning skills but different HISTORY perspectives,
perhaps, to form a functional (and highly functioning) team.
This paradigm not only concretely, but flexibly, describes a level of functioning
that represents independent competence (journeyman) and explicitly distinguishes
between the training and mentoring that individuals receive at different levels of their
respective fields/disciplines. Furthermore, this paradigm supports the assessment
and documentation of achieving journeyman-level ethical reasoning without requir-
ing advanced (e.g., graduate) education in ethics, per se. Therefore, a working group
could be comprised of professionals from a number of disciplines, who will have and