We are currently witnessing a rapid convergence of different disciplines, in particular between artificial intelligence and modern neurotechnologies that make it possible to capture or modify human brain activity. While these developments are driving brain research and neural engineering forward, they also raise serious questions about surveillance, subtly influencing decisions and the collection of mental and neural data.
In response, the concept of neurorights emerged. Neurorights refer to ethical, legal, social or natural principles that affect the freedom or rights of an individual in relation to their brain and mental integrity.
A team from the University of Graz conducted a study on this topic on behalf of the European Parliament. Project leader Guilherme Wood and the interdisciplinary project team therefore looked at the psychological (Guilherme Wood and Lisa Berger), legal (Elisabeth Staudegger and Petra Zandonella), social (Juliane Jarke and Gwendolin Barnard) and ethical (Thomas Gremsl and Eugen Dolezal) implications of neurotechnologies.
Their study shows that not only highly invasive neurotechnologies such as the Neuralink system pose new challenges, but also the entire spectrum of invasive and non-invasive neurotechnologies. This is because these technologies together create a socio-technical ecosystem that is characterized by exaggerated optimism, so-called "neuroenchantment". This neuroenchantment effect reduces critical thinking and leads to new normative values that can potentially come into conflict with European values and laws.
The study was presented on 25.04.2024 in Strasbourg and has now been published by the STOA.