Andrea Lavazza and Rodolfo Giorgi argue that the development and use of neurotechnology present new challenges to privacy, mental integrity, and autonomy, necessitating a reevaluation of existing ethical frameworks and the introduction of new rights to protect individuals against potential threats to these fundamental aspects of human dignity.
The authors first examine the concept of intentionality, highlighting its importance for understanding the subjective and first-person perspective of mental experiences. They argue that neurotechnology poses a risk to intentionality by potentially manipulating or monitoring individuals’ mental processes. This risk extends to the first-person perspective, as the development of brain-computer interfaces could blur the boundaries between the self and external entities, undermining the sense of ownership and agency that is integral to personal identity.
The paper further discusses the significance of autonomy in moral decision-making and identity-building. Drawing upon moral constructivism, the authors contend that privacy and mental integrity are crucial for individuals to engage in the process of moral self-determination. They assert that neurotechnology has the potential to interfere with this process, leading to misinterpretations of mental states and behaviors, and ultimately hindering individuals’ ability to make autonomous choices and form their own moral judgments.
This research contributes to broader philosophical issues by shedding light on the complex relationship between emerging neurotechnology and fundamental aspects of human nature, such as intentionality, autonomy, and personal identity. It underscores the importance of establishing a right to mental integrity in order to protect these essential elements of human dignity in a world increasingly influenced by advancements in neuroscience and technology.
For future research, it is vital to investigate the ethical and legal implications of the right to mental integrity, delineating its scope and limitations in relation to neurotechnology. This may include examining the potential consequences of different types of interventions, ranging from non-invasive monitoring to direct manipulation of brain states. Additionally, interdisciplinary collaboration between philosophers, neuroscientists, and policymakers will be crucial to developing comprehensive ethical guidelines that address the profound challenges posed by the ongoing development and implementation of neurotechnology in various domains of human life. By bridging these disciplines, we can ensure that the protection of mental integrity remains a central consideration as we navigate the uncharted territory of human-machine interaction.
Abstract
Neurotechnologies broadly understood are tools that have the capability to read, record and modify our mental activity by acting on its brain correlates. The emergence of increasingly powerful and sophisticated techniques has given rise to the proposal to introduce new rights specifically directed to protect mental privacy, freedom of thought, and mental integrity. These rights, also proposed as basic human rights, are conceived in direct relation to tools that threaten mental privacy, freedom of thought, mental integrity, and personal identity. In this paper, our goal is to give a philosophical foundation to a specific right that we will call right to mental integrity. It encapsulates both the classical concepts of privacy and non-interference in our mind/brain. Such a philosophical foundation refers to certain features of the mind that hitherto could not be reached directly from the outside: intentionality, first-person perspective, personal autonomy in moral choices and in the construction of one’s narrative, and relational identity. A variety of neurotechnologies or other tools, including artificial intelligence, alone or in combination can, by their very availability, threaten our mental integrity. Therefore, it is necessary to posit a specific right and provide it with a theoretical foundation and justification. It will be up to a subsequent treatment to define the moral and legal boundaries of such a right and its application.
Philosophical foundation of the right to mental integrity in the age of neurotechnologies