I recently received an email with the phrase “ethics of neurotechnology” in the subject line and was more than intrigued. The email reported that in November, UNESCO announced it had adopted a global standard that dealt with the ethics of neurotechnology. According to the release, the new standard “… establishes essential safeguards to ensure that neurotechnology contributes to improving the lives of those who need it the most, without jeopardizing human rights.”
The move recognizes the potential of neurotechnology to radically change people’s lives while also recognizing the risks associated with it.
But what exactly is neurotechnology? It is essentially a device that can directly interact with the human nervous system to do a number of things, from measuring neural or brain activity to stimulation (for muscle movement). There are clear medical uses with benefits for treating depression or relieving the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease, and more recently brain-computer interfaces which allow people with disabilities to control prosthetic limbs or even communicate via thought-reading devices, which are still largely in their infancy.
Source: UN University Centre for Policy Research
The release also points out that while medical uses are regulated, other commercial uses are not. These can include devices such as headbands or personal fitness trackers, which use neural data to monitor heart rate or stress. The nature of this data is highly sensitive and may be shared in unknown ways without users’ explicit consent.
What struck me most about this announcement was the recognition of the need for such a standard in the first place. That is, recognizing that progress in medical science and the related engineering of medical technology devices gives rise to potential impacts on people’s lives, and especially recognizing the impacts on some basic human rights.
Specifically, the UNESCO report calls attention to a number of ethical concerns that arise from the nature of these technologies, including mental integrity and human dignity, personal identity, freedom of thought or cognitive liberty, and mental privacy.
All of these concerns come under the umbrella of a broader concern with personal autonomy and privacy. This makes sense as these new technologies are potentially powerful tools that interface with what humans understand to be their most intimate and personal selves; their mental interior, the citadel of their identity and privacy.
It’s easy to see how new neural technologies can impact this directly in ways never before possible. And so, a deep dive into the realities, possibilities, and risks associated with these technologies (beyond simply the benefits) is essential to get a full grasp of their potential as well as the risks and dangers they pose.
Even the fact that an international body is raising these issues is a positive sign; an acknowledgment that technology has social impacts that can be studied, and that mitigating risks, something that was certainly not the norm in the past, has become more so in recent times.
As the Director-General of UNESCO, Audrey Azoulay, puts it, it is a recognition that “… technological progress is only worthwhile if it is guided by ethics, dignity, and responsibility towards future generations.”
Miles Budimir
Senior Editor
Filed Under: Commentaries • insights • Technical thinking, NEWS • PROFILES • EDITORIALS
