This week it was reported that soldiers could potentially, in the near future, have their minds plugged directly into weapons systems, and have their learning boosted by neural stimulation. The Royal Society’s [UK Academy of Sciences] Brain Waves project on new directions in neuro-science gives us much to reflect on and worry about. It follows the news last week that scientists are developing a “mind-reading” technique to capture thoughts.
Research in all this is in its infancy, but though new understandings of how the brain works generate new treatments for disease and brain damage, they also expose us to many new dangers. The challenge is always to use judgement, and, if necessary force, to maximize good and minimize evil. However, we should be clear that there is no precautionary approach; therapy delayed is rescue denied. As in all other areas of human activity, choice is not an option, but a destiny. How should we choose?
The Royal Society report spoke of brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) to connect people’s brains directly to machinery. These interfaces are already being used to control artificial limbs for amputees, but they would also be efficient in improving speed and accuracy in delivering weapons systems.
Rod Flower, chair of the report’s working group, rightly asks: “If you are controlling a drone and you shoot the wrong target or bomb a wedding party, who is responsible for that action? Is it you or the BMI?”
While this is a nice puzzle, the alternative without BMIs might be a greater likelihood that the wrong target will be chosen or hit. If we ban military BMIs, who is responsible for that?
The bigger question, though, is how to reduce the incidence of events where people suffer and others need to be called to account. Think of smart drugs that improve thought. Modafinil, a drug that keeps pilots alert, can indeed aid military pilots — but it also protects civilian passengers. The same drug also enhances other cognitive functioning, including exam performance.
We humans need to be smarter in order to combat a monstrous regiment of dangers that include climate change, meteorite strikes, diseases such as AIDS and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and an over-precautionary approach to innovation that could increase, rather than reduce, our vulnerability to these and other dangers. The dilemma is: Whither caution? The ability to choose between caution and adventure assumes we can predict accurately — something we humans have been lamentably bad at.
In future, we are also likely to face an ethical dilemma over memory manipulation. This is now a distinct possibility because drugs are available that can wipe, or certainly dampen, our recollection of events. Why should we tamper with our access to history? Well, one good reason is that memories can be traumatic. The victim of, for example, a brutal rape, might well wish to wipe the memory. However, what if so doing removes the capacity to identify the perpetrator, and leaves him free to ruin others’ lives?
The neurotransmitter serotonin and the molecule oxytocin are hailed as agents that, by increasing reluctance to cause suffering on the one hand and trust on the other, can bring about an improvement in morals. Adjusting the levels of these chemicals in the body will effect changes that bypass decision-making and make certain behavior, for all practical purposes, automatic. Why should we worry about bypassing morally defective decisionmaking? One reason is it takes away our freedom.
Without the ability to reason about our decisions to act on the basis of judgement — rather than prompted by impulse or chemical, or biological or technological stimulus — we not only lack liberty, the ability to choose. We lack the ability to choose wisely and well, to choose the best, “all things considered.”
If we can read minds, we might be able to literally see what someone has done and whether they did it on purpose. This would make solving crimes in principle simple and reliable. The problem here will be whether the science can reliably distinguish thoughts that describe fantasies or imaginings rather than real dirty deeds done.
The idea that neuroscience might enable thoughts to be read and intentions revealed is perhaps the most threatening of all to civil liberties. If we know someone intends to commit a murder or a robbery, why not monitor their thoughts and act pre-emptively? Apart from the obvious difference in quality between a wish or intention and an actual attempt, the reason might be that most of us form intentions that we abandon and wishes we never fulfill.
The price of liberty may be eternal vigilance, but we need science, not least because it is our most obvious source of the sort of innovation that saves lives and produces welfare. Our vigilance must be as much to ensure we do not stifle science as it is to be sure science remains our servant not our master.
John Harris is a member of the Royal Society Brain Waves project and professor of bioethics at the University of Manchester.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95