Brain–Computer Interfaces and User Responsibility
Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) allow people to control external devices using only the power of their thoughts. This chapter explores BCIs in terms of individual user responsibility. Firstly, BCIs are introduced. Following this, the concept of individual responsibility is discussed. After that three novel aspects of BCIs that will have an impact on user responsibility are outlined. These are the control of external things via the mind alone, the possibility of subconscious thoughts as actuators of BCI devices, and mind-melding via BCIs. Then the analysis focuses on claims regarding (a) the effect of BCIs on the extent of responsibility, and (b) the allocation of responsibility.
KeywordsTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Deep Brain Stimulation Moral Responsibility User Responsibility External Device
- Anthony, Sebastian. 2012. Hackers backdoor the human brain, successfully extract sensitive data. ExtremeTech. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/134682-hackers-backdoor-the-human-brain-successfully-extract-sensitive-data
- Aristotle. 1985. Nicomachean ethics. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA. 2009. Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Budget estimates: Research, development, test and evaluation, defense-wide. http://websearch.darpa.mil/search?q=cache:sVHHsSY9hLQJ:www.darpa.mil/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D538+Silent+Talk&access=p&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&client=default_frontend&site=default_collection&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&oe=UTF-8.
- École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. 2011. Nissan teams up with EPFL for futurist car interfaces. EPFL News Mediacom. http://actu.epfl.ch/news/nissan-teams-up-with-epfl-for-futurist-car-interfa
- Edlinger, G., C. Holzner, and C. Guger. 2011. A Hybrid Brain-Computer Interface for Smart Home Control. In Human-computer interaction. Interaction techniques and environments, ed. J.A. Jacko, 417–426. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-21605-3_46
- Foster, K.R. 2006. Engineering the brain. In Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice, and policy, ed. Judy Illes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Gordijn, B., and A.M. Buyx. 2010. Neural engineering. The challenges ahead. In Scientific and philosophical perspectives in neuroethics, ed. J. Giordano and B. Gordijn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Halperin, D., T.S. Heydt-Benjamin, B. Ransford, S.S. Clark, B. Defend, W. Morgan, and W.H. Maisel. 2008. Pacemakers and implantable cardiac defibrillators: Software radio attacks and zero-power defenses. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 129–142. doi: 10.1109/SP.2008.31.
- Harris, P. 2011. BrainGate gives paralysed the power of mind control. The Guardian, Apr 17. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/apr/17/brain-implant-paralysis-movement.
- Holm, S., and T.C. Voo. 2011. Brain-machine interfaces and personal responsibility for action – maybe not as complicated after all. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 4(3). doi: 10.2202/1941-6008.1153.
- Martin, Richard. 2005. Mind control. Wired, Mar 13. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.03/brain.html.
- Martinovic, I., D. Davies, M. Frank, D. Perito, T. Ros, and D. Song. 2012. On the feasibility of side-channel attacks with brain-computer interfaces. Presented at the 21st USENIC security symposium, Bellevie, WA.Google Scholar
- Science Daily. 2009. Applause for the SmartHand. http://phys.org/news176564795.html.
- Vernon, D.J. 2005. Can neurofeedback training enhance performance? An evaluation of the evidence with implications for future research. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback 30(4): 347–364.Google Scholar
- Vincent, N.A. 2009. Neuroimaging and responsibility assessments. SSRN eLibrary. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1519431