A world in which our most intimate thoughts, politics, feelings, and obsessions could be investigated and punished is a near reality. At least that’s what Professor Nita Farahany, one of the leading ethicists in neuroscience, believes.
In her new book “The Battle for Your Brain,” Professor Farahany argues that intrusions into the human mind via technology are so close that a public discussion is imperative, and policymakers must immediately put in place brain protections as they would to any other area of personal freedom.
Technological advances and ethical risks
Professor Farahany raises a number of ethical risks that should be considered in the field of neuroscience, including:
- The possibility of thoughts being hacked and tracked.
- The implications for justice and the intent of the law.
- Interference in the privacy and mental freedom of people.
- The danger of political indoctrination and workplace or police surveillance.
- Concerns around cognitive fingerprinting technology.
A call to action
Professor Farahany believes that advances in neurotechnology mean that intrusions into mental privacy via technology are close at hand, both through military programs and the research labs of big tech companies. The combination of science geared toward decoding and rewriting brain functions, along with the use of wearable technology, means that cognitive fingerprinting will become increasingly common in the near future.
He argues that societies need to move beyond tackling cognitive warfare or banning tech apps like TikTok. Instead, laws establishing brain rights or cognitive freedoms are needed, along with increased awareness of the risks of intrusion posed by digital platforms embedded with advances in neuroscience.
The way to follow
Professor Farahany believes that “neurocognitive rights” laws are needed that include protections on the use of biometric data in health and legal settings. Chile became the first country to add articles to its Constitution to explicitly address the challenges of emerging neurotechnologies. The US state of Wisconsin has also enacted laws regarding the collection of brain-related biometric data.
Farahany also believes that an urgent conversation is needed about cognitive freedoms, which include self-determination over our brains and mental experiences, and applies to many of the digital technologies we are using today. The absence of comprehensive protections for mental privacy is cause for concern and may become a contemporary reality.
Their proposal is a call for urgent action to address the ethical risks posed by the advancement of neurotechnology. The possibility of hacking our thoughts and controlling our emotions is an issue that must be taken seriously by governments, companies and society in general.
It is important that the protection of mental privacy is considered as a fundamental human rights issue. Cognitive freedom is a right that must be protected by law, just like other fundamental rights. In addition, it is important that public awareness of the risks of technology is promoted and clear ethical limits are set for its use.
It is critical that technology is used responsibly and that governments, businesses and society at large work together to ensure that advances in neurotechnology are used for the common good and not for the control and manipulation of individuals.
