All Posts

Brazilian legal education faces the challenge of integrating generative artificial intelligence without abandoning critical thinking, ethics, and humanistic training. More than adopting tools, it must prepare jurists to understand, regulate, and question the technology already transforming law.

Post-biological beneficence does not grant moral status to every machine. Instead, it proposes a bioethics capable of addressing non-biological systems that already shape human life, agency and vulnerability. From instrumental benefit to artificial relationships, critical infrastructures, autonomous agency and possible artificial welfare, bioethics must guide technology before harms become irreversible.

When ordinary physiological signals, such as coughing, are analysed by AI, public health moves closer to security, surveillance, and institutional control. The bioethical question is no longer simply whether the technology works, but who is allowed to listen to the body, interpret its signals, and act upon them.

A neuroplasticidade representa simultaneamente uma oportunidade terapêutica extraordinária e um desafio antropológico sem precedentes. O futuro da investigação neurocientífica dependerá da capacidade de articular inovação científica, responsabilidade moral e proteção da dignidade humana.

Num mundo que vive profundas mudanças culturais, sociais e tecnológicas, é urgente voltar a perguntar: para que educamos? A educação não é apenas transmissão de conhecimentos, mas formação integral da pessoa, fundada na dignidade humana. Educar é despertar consciências, orientar a liberdade para o bem e gerar uma cultura de paz.

Loitering munitions make a decisive tension visible: technology can increase precision, but it can also distance the human agent from the moral decision to kill. The ethical question is not merely whether the weapon is effective or legal, but whether it preserves real human judgment, clear responsibility, and democratic limits on lethal force.

Medical AI is no longer merely a support tool: it is beginning to become a third presence in the consultation. Between doctor, patient, and algorithmic co-clinician, autonomy requires more than consent. It requires understanding, contestation, alternatives, and human responsibility, so that the patient remains the author of the decision affecting their health, body, and future.

Health data are not merely information: they are sensitive fragments of the person. Their secondary use can improve research, public policy, and clinical innovation, but it requires privacy, understandable consent, fiduciary governance, and continuous transparency. Without post-consent autonomy, technical data protection may coexist with the ethical loss of the person.

Brain–Computer Interfaces (BCIs) hold transformative potential for space exploration, offering solutions for astronaut performance, communication, and safety. This paper examines BCI integration in space missions, identifying gaps in empirical validation, philosophical and neuroethical analysis, and regulation