Why Won’t You Listen To Me? Predictive Neurotechnology and Epistemic Authority

Author:

Tacca Alessio,Gilbert FredericORCID

Abstract

AbstractFrom epileptic seizures to depressive symptoms, predictive neurotechnologies are used for a large range of applications. In this article we focus on advisory devices; namely, predictive neurotechnology programmed to detect specific neural events (e.g., epileptic seizure) and advise users to take necessary steps to reduce or avoid the impact of the forecasted neuroevent. Receiving advise from a predictive device is not without ethical concerns. The problem with predictive neural devices, in particular advisory ones, is the risk of seeing one’s autonomous choice supplanted by the predictions instead of being supplemented by it. For users, there is a potential shift from being assisted by the system to being over-dependent on the technology. In other terms, it introduces ethical issues associated with epistemic dependency. In this article, we examine the notion of epistemic authority in relation to predictive neurotechnologies. Section 1 of our article explores and defines the concept of epistemic authority. In section 2, we illustrate how predictive devices are best conceived of as epistemic authorities and we explore the subject-device epistemic relationship. In section 3, we spell out the risk of harms interconnected with epistemic deferral. We conclude by stressing a set of preliminary measures to prepare users for the authoritative nature of predictive devices.

Funder

University of Tasmania

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Health Policy,Neurology,Philosophy

Reference30 articles.

1. Haeusermann, T., C.R. Lechner, K.C. Fong, A. Bernstein Sideman, A. Jaworska, W. Chiong, et al. 2021. Closed-Loop Neuromodulation and Self-Perception in Clinical Treatment of Refractory Epilepsy. AJOB Neuroscience 2: 1–13.

2. Gilbert, F. 2015. A Threat to Autonomy? The Intrusion of Predictive Brain Implants. AJOB Neuroscience 6 (4): 4–11.

3. Miletic, T., and F. Gilbert. 2020. Does AI Brain Implant Compromise Agency? Examining Potential Harms of Brain-Computer Interfaces on Self-Determination. Ed Gouveia S.S., In: Artificial Intelligence and Information: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Vernon Press. Pages 253-272. ISBN: 978-1-62273-872-4

4. Gilbert, F., M. Cook, T. O’Brien, and J. Illes. 2018. Embodiment and Estrangement: Results from a First-in-Human “Intelligent BCI” Trial. Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (1): 83–96.

5. Gilbert, F., T. O’Brien, and M. Cook. 2018. The Effects of Closed-Loop Brain Implants on Autonomy and Deliberation: What are the Risks of Being Kept in the Loop? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics: CQ: The International Journal of Healthcare Ethics Committees 27 (2): 316–325.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. How to deal with mind-reading technologies;Frontiers in Psychology;2023-11-14

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3