Abstract
The rapid development of neurotechnologies with unprecedented access to neural data has motivated the creation of legal frameworks aiming at protecting the general public from their possible misuses. In a pioneering action, the Senate of Chile has recently published the first ever Bill for the Creation of Neurorights. This bill promises to protect “the human mind.” Here, I argue that there are good reasons to demand a clarification of the way in which the notion of “mind” is conceptualized within the bill in order to avoid fundamental problems. After that, I explore an alternative way in which the concept of mind can be integrated into the legal debate including anthropological, biological and subjective (phenomenal) elements that might respect the different pre-theoretical intuitions and dimensions that motivate the neuroprotection crusade.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alivisatos AP, Chun M, Church GM, Deisseroth K, Greenspan R, McEuen PRJ, Roukes ML, Sejnowski TS, Weiss P, Yuste R (2013) The brain activity map. Science 339:1284–1285
Andrews A, Weiss P (2012) Nano in the brain: nano-neuroscience. ACS Nano 23(10):8463–8464
Bennett MR, Hacker PMS (2003) Philosophical foundations of neuroscience. Blackwell, London
Chalmers D (1996) The conscious mind. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Craig JN (2016) Incarceration, direct brain intervention, and the right to mental integrity—A reply to Thomas Douglas. Neuroethics 9:107–118
Fernandez A, Sriraman N, Gurevitz B, Ouiller O (2015) Pervasive neurotechnology: a groundbreaking analysis of 10,000+ patent filings transforming medicine, health, entertainment and business. SharpBrains, San Francisco
Goering S, Yuste R (2016) On the necessity of ethical guidelines for novel neurotechnologies. Cell 167(4):882–885
Haggard P, Eitam B (2015) The sense of agency. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Ienca M, Andorno R (2017) Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sci Soc Policy 13(5). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1
Ienca M (2017) Preserving the right to cognitive liberty. Sci Am 317(2):10
Jackson F (1986) What Mary didn’t know. J Philos 83(5):291–295
Johnson B (2021) Kernel flow 50 sneak peak. https://www.bryanjohnson.co/articles/kernel-flow-50-sneak-peek-ep-2
Jonas H (2001) The phenomenon of life: toward a philosophical biology. Northwestern University Press, Evanston
Koch C, Reid RC (2012) Neuroscience: observatories of the mind. Nature 483:397–398
López-Silva P, Madrid R (2021) Sobre la Conveniencia de incluir los Neuroderechos en la Constitución o en la Ley. Rev Chil De Derecho y Tecnol 10(1):49–72
López-Silva P (2019) Neuroethical concerns about neuroprotection law-making. In: Conference: “Es hora de los neuroderechos?,” Centro de Innovación, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile (Chile)
Lowe EJ (2003) An introduction to the philosophy of mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Ministerio de Justicia de la República de Chile (2021) Código civil. Editorial Jurídica de Chile, Santiago de Chile
Nagel T (2013) Mind & cosmos. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Nagel T (1974) What is it like to be a bat? Philos Rev 83:435–456
Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (2014) Gray matters. In: Integrative approaches for neuroscience, ethics and society, vol 1, Bioethics Commission, Washington, DC
Senate of Chile (2020) Bulletin N°13.828-19. https://www.diarioconstitucional.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/boletin-13828-19-nuroderechos.pdf
Shein F (2013) Neuroscience, mental privacy, and the law. Harv J Law Public Policy 36(2):653–713
Sommaggio P, Mazzocca M, Gerola A, Ferro F (2017) Cognitive liberty: a first step towards a human neuro-right declaration. BioLaw J 3:27–45
Yuste R (2019) Everyone has the right to neuroprotection. Columbia Neuroright Initiative. https://nri.ntc.columbia.edu/news/rafael-yuste-and-brain-hacking-everyone-has-right-neuroprotection-originally-spanish
Yuste R (2020a) Si puedes leer y escribir la actividad neuronal, puedes leer y escribir las mentes de la gente. El País, 4 Dice 2020. https://elpais.com/retina/2020/12/03/tendencias/1607024987_022417.html
Yuste R et al (2017) Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI. Nature 551(7679):159–163
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
López-Silva, P. (2022). The Concept of Mind in the Neuroprotection Debate. In: López-Silva, P., Valera, L. (eds) Protecting the Mind. Ethics of Science and Technology Assessment, vol 49. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94032-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94032-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-94031-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-94032-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)