Neurotechnologies Cannot Seize Thoughts: A Call for Caution in Nomenclature.
Neurotechnologies Cannot Seize Thoughts: A Call for Caution in Nomenclature.
复制标题
神经技术无法抓住思想：命名时需谨慎。
DOI：
10.1080/21507740.2019.1595779
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Goering,Sara
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
MacDuffie,KatherineE;Goering,Sara
Meynen（2019）为读者提供了一个思考练习：想象一下未来，用于检测精神状态的神经技术应用于法医精神病学环境。这类技术的例子很多，从原始的基于功能性磁共振成像（fMRI）的与植物人状态患者的交流，到允许机器人手臂自主运动的脑机接口，Meynen将这些方法统称为”神经技术思维理解（NTA）"--这是一个有点挑衅性和（我们认为）误导性的标签。思想理解这个词意味着感知特定思想的能力，这超出了当前技术的范围。虽然Meynen承认我们还没有
Meynen (2019) offers the reader a thought exercise: Imagine a future in which neurotechnologies for detecting mental states are applied in a forensic psychiatry setting. A broad range of examples of such technologies are offered, ranging from crude functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)-based communication with patients in a vegetative state to brain-computer interfaces that allow for volitional movement of a robotic arm. Meynen collectively calls these approaches" neurotechnological thought apprehension (NTA)"-a somewhat provocative and (we argue) misleading label. The phrase thought apprehension implies an ability to perceive specific thoughts, which is beyond the scope of current technologies. While Meynen acknowledges that we are not yet