The psychologically relevant question of how the self will relate to a mood−enhanced, more capable version of itself is rendered irrelevant by the fact that the requirements of the new capitalist reality make an individual improvement of this kind appear a highly desirable option.
Yikes. Really? That question doesn't sound irrelevant to me.
I'm shocked that the authors were not more circumspect about the parallels they've drawn between "neurocapitalism" and psychoanalysis, seeing as psychoanalysis eventually proved to be too obscure for its own purposes and fell into disrepute. Doesn't it seem a little too easy to assume that we can generalize about the brain states of emotions and then medicalize them for everyone?
How do we even know our emotional categories are correct? Doesn't that assume we've come up with an English word for every conceivable emotional state?
The idea that brain states can be generalized to every person needs MUCH more intense scrutiny than these authors provide.
I'm terrified of a Brave New World like this "neurocapitalist" nightmare. A pharmaceutical-dependent society is just asking to be dominated by the pushers at the top. What do you think of this article?