Identifying Criteria for the Evaluation of the Implications of Brain Reading for Mental Privacy.
Identifying Criteria for the Evaluation of the Implications of Brain Reading for Mental Privacy.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11948-017-0003-3
复制
发表时间：
2019-04
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Haselager P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mecacci G;Haselager P
当代的脑阅读技术有望提供解码和解释心理状态和过程的可能性。大脑阅读可能会产生许多与社会相关的影响。特别是，心灵的私人性可能会受到影响，从而产生伦理和法律方面的担忧。本文旨在为伦理学家和政策制定者提供概念工具，以支持对当前和不久的将来脑阅读技术的潜在适用性和影响的评估。我们首先澄清读心和读脑的概念，以及原则上可以阅读的不同类型的精神状态。随后，我们设计了一个由五个标准组成的评估框架--准确性、可靠性、信息性、隐蔽性和可执行性--旨在更清楚地估计在精神隐私可能受到威胁的情况下，大脑阅读可能在多大程度上得到实际应用。虽然准确性和可靠性决定了某种方法能够很好地获取心理内容，但信息性表明了可获得的数据与实际目的的相关性。隐蔽性和可执行性对于评估可能侵犯精神隐私权和公民权利的关切特别重要。前者关注的是大脑阅读方法在多大程度上可以被个人的感知或意识所掩盖。后者关注的是一种方法可以在多大程度上违背某人的意愿。在这些标准的帮助下，利益相关者可以在快速发展的脑部阅读领域进行定位。
Contemporary brain reading technologies promise to provide the possibility to decode and interpret mental states and processes. Brain reading could have numerous societally relevant implications. In particular, the private character of mind might be affected, generating ethical and legal concerns. This paper aims at equipping ethicists and policy makers with conceptual tools to support an evaluation of the potential applicability and the implications of current and near future brain reading technology. We start with clarifying the concepts of mind reading and brain reading, and the different kinds of mental states that could in principle be read. Subsequently, we devise an evaluative framework that is composed of five criteria-accuracy, reliability, informativity, concealability and enforceability-aimed at enabling a clearer estimation of the degree to which brain reading might be realistically deployed in contexts where mental privacy could be at stake. While accuracy and reliability capture how well a certain method can access mental content, informativity indicates the relevance the obtainable data have for practical purposes. Concealability and enforceability are particularly important for the evaluation of concerns about potential violations of mental privacy and civil rights. The former concerns the degree with which a brain reading method can be concealed from an individual’s perception or awareness. The latter regards the extent to which a method can be used against somebody’s will. With the help of these criteria, stakeholders can orient themselves in the rapidly developing field of brain reading.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Habermeyer, Benedikt;Esposito, Fabrizio;Graf, Marc
通讯作者：
Graf, Marc
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Bode, Stefan;Bogler, Carsten;Haynes, John-Dylan
通讯作者：
Haynes, John-Dylan
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Blume C;Del Giudice R;Wislowska M;Lechinger J;Schabus M
通讯作者：
Schabus M
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Bode, Stefan;Bogler, Carsten;Haynes, John-Dylan
通讯作者：
Haynes, John-Dylan
影响因子：
25
作者：
Cukur, Tolga;Nishimoto, Shinji;Huth, Alexander G.;Gallant, Jack L.
通讯作者：
Gallant, Jack L.