x
Loading
+ -

From Healthcare to Warfare: How to Regulate Brain Technology

brain, computer, interface, neurotechnology
Is it legitimate to conduct military research on neurotechnology? (Image: Ars Electronica | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Ethicists from the University of Basel have outlined a new biosecurity framework specific to neurotechnology. While the researchers declare an outright ban of dual-use technology ethically unjustified, they call for regulations aimed at protecting the mental privacy and integrity of humans. The journal Neuron has published the study.

18 January 2018

brain, computer, interface, neurotechnology
Is it legitimate to conduct military research on neurotechnology? (Image: Ars Electronica | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

The term “dual-use” refers to technology that can be used for both beneficial (i.e., medical) and harmful (i.e., military of terroristic) aims. Until recently, most dual-use technology emerged especially in virology and bacteriology. In the last years, however, military-funded research has entered the domain of neuroscience and neurotechnology.

This has resulted in a rapid growth in brain technology prototypes aimed at modulating the emotions, cognition, and behavior of soldiers. These include neurotechnological applications for deception detection and interrogation as well as brain-computer interfaces for military purposes.

Neurotechnology and ethical issues

This military research has raised concern about the risks associated with the weaponization of neurotechnology, sparking a debate about controversial questions: Is it legitimate to conduct military research on brain technology? And how should policy-makers regulate dual-use neurotechnology?

Thematic focal area
To top