Merging Minds: The Conceptual and Ethical Impacts of Emerging Technologies for Collective Minds.

IF 2.6 4区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Neuroethics Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s12152-023-09516-3
David M Lyreskog, Hazem Zohny, Julian Savulescu, Ilina Singh
{"title":"Merging Minds: The Conceptual and Ethical Impacts of Emerging Technologies for Collective Minds.","authors":"David M Lyreskog,&nbsp;Hazem Zohny,&nbsp;Julian Savulescu,&nbsp;Ilina Singh","doi":"10.1007/s12152-023-09516-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A growing number of technologies are currently being developed to improve and distribute thinking and decision-making. Rapid progress in brain-to-brain interfacing and swarming technologies promises to transform how we think about collective and collaborative cognitive tasks across domains, ranging from research to entertainment, and from therapeutics to military applications. As these tools continue to improve, we are prompted to monitor how they may affect our society on a broader level, but also how they may reshape our fundamental understanding of agency, responsibility, and other key concepts of our moral landscape. In this paper we take a closer look at this class of technologies - Technologies for Collective Minds - to see not only how their implementation may react with commonly held moral values, but also how they challenge our underlying concepts of what constitutes collective or individual agency. We argue that prominent contemporary frameworks for understanding collective agency and responsibility are insufficient in terms of accurately describing the relationships enabled by Technologies for Collective Minds, and that they therefore risk obstructing ethical analysis of the implementation of these technologies in society. We propose a more multidimensional approach to better understand this set of technologies, and to facilitate future research on the ethics of Technologies for Collective Minds.</p>","PeriodicalId":49255,"journal":{"name":"Neuroethics","volume":"16 1","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10050050/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-023-09516-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A growing number of technologies are currently being developed to improve and distribute thinking and decision-making. Rapid progress in brain-to-brain interfacing and swarming technologies promises to transform how we think about collective and collaborative cognitive tasks across domains, ranging from research to entertainment, and from therapeutics to military applications. As these tools continue to improve, we are prompted to monitor how they may affect our society on a broader level, but also how they may reshape our fundamental understanding of agency, responsibility, and other key concepts of our moral landscape. In this paper we take a closer look at this class of technologies - Technologies for Collective Minds - to see not only how their implementation may react with commonly held moral values, but also how they challenge our underlying concepts of what constitutes collective or individual agency. We argue that prominent contemporary frameworks for understanding collective agency and responsibility are insufficient in terms of accurately describing the relationships enabled by Technologies for Collective Minds, and that they therefore risk obstructing ethical analysis of the implementation of these technologies in society. We propose a more multidimensional approach to better understand this set of technologies, and to facilitate future research on the ethics of Technologies for Collective Minds.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
融合思想:新兴技术对集体思想的概念和伦理影响。
目前正在开发越来越多的技术来改进和分配思维和决策。脑对脑接口和蜂群技术的快速发展有望改变我们对跨领域的集体和协作认知任务的看法,从研究到娱乐,从治疗到军事应用。随着这些工具的不断改进,我们被要求监测它们如何在更广泛的层面上影响我们的社会,以及它们如何重塑我们对代理、责任和其他道德景观关键概念的基本理解。在本文中,我们仔细研究了这类技术——集体思想技术——不仅要看看它们的实现如何与普遍持有的道德价值观相反应,还要看看它们如何挑战我们关于什么构成集体或个人代理的基本概念。我们认为,理解集体代理和责任的主要当代框架在准确描述集体思想技术所实现的关系方面是不够的,因此它们有可能阻碍对这些技术在社会中实施的伦理分析。我们提出了一种更多维的方法来更好地理解这组技术,并促进未来对集体思想技术伦理的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neuroethics
Neuroethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuroethics is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to academic articles on the ethical, legal, political, social and philosophical questions provoked by research in the contemporary sciences of the mind and brain; especially, but not only, neuroscience, psychiatry and psychology. The journal publishes articles on questions raised by the sciences of the brain and mind, and on the ways in which the sciences of the brain and mind illuminate longstanding debates in ethics and philosophy.
期刊最新文献
Responding to existential distress at the end of life: Psychedelics and psychedelic experiences and/ as medicine Deep Brain Stimulation for Consciousness Disorders; Technical and Ethical Considerations Neurorights, Mental Privacy, and Mind Reading A Transformative Trip? Experiences of Psychedelic Use Neurotechnological Applications and the Protection of Mental Privacy: An Assessment of Risks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1