Zohny Hazem, Savulescu Julian
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Chen Su Lan Centennial Professor in Medical Ethics, Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2024 Apr 12;33(4):1-13. doi: 10.1017/S0963180124000197.
Advances in brain-brain interface technologies raise the possibility that two or more individuals could directly link their minds, sharing thoughts, emotions, and sensory experiences. This paper explores conceptual and ethical issues posed by such mind-merging technologies in the context of clinical neuroethics. Using hypothetical examples along a spectrum from loosely connected pairs to fully merged minds, the authors sketch out a range of factors relevant to identifying the degree of a merger. They then consider potential new harms like loss of identity, psychological domination, loss of mental privacy, and challenges for notions of autonomy and patient benefit when applied to merged minds. While radical technologies may seem to necessitate new ethical paradigms, the authors suggest the individual-focus underpinning clinical ethics can largely accommodate varying degrees of mind mergers so long as individual patient interests remain identifiable. However, advanced decisionmaking and directives may have limitations in addressing the dilemmas posed. Overall, mind-merging possibilities amplify existing challenges around loss of identity, relating to others, autonomy, privacy, and the delineation of patient interests. This paper lays the groundwork for developing resources to address the novel issues raised, while suggesting the technologies reveal continuity with current healthcare ethics tensions.
脑-脑接口技术的进步增加了这样一种可能性,即两个或更多个体可以直接连接他们的思维,共享思想、情感和感官体验。本文在临床神经伦理学的背景下探讨了这种思维融合技术所带来的概念和伦理问题。作者通过从联系松散的两人组合到完全融合的思维等一系列假设示例,勾勒出了一系列与确定融合程度相关的因素。然后,他们考虑了潜在的新危害,如身份丧失、心理支配、精神隐私丧失,以及应用于融合思维时对自主性和患者利益观念的挑战。虽然激进的技术似乎需要新的伦理范式,但作者认为,只要能够确定个体患者的利益,临床伦理学所强调的个体关注在很大程度上可以适应不同程度的思维融合。然而,预先制定的决策和指令在应对所带来的困境时可能存在局限性。总体而言,思维融合的可能性加剧了围绕身份丧失、与他人的关系、自主性、隐私以及患者利益界定等方面的现有挑战。本文为开发应对所提出的新问题的资源奠定了基础,同时表明这些技术揭示了与当前医疗保健伦理紧张关系的连续性。