New technologies have been emerging almost without an end. This phenomenon is comparable to the situation where scientists in the 19th century had continuously discovered new atomic particles and thought that they were all elementary particles! Everyone is concerned about emerging new technologies as they have a perception that these technologies will increase the quality of life as well as bring more benefits than harms. However, this may not applies on some technologies such as the brain mapping technologies. One such technology is functional magnetic resonance or commonly known as fMRI which could detect brain activity by tracking changes in blood oxygen level. These technologies are capable to ‘read’ one’s mind and hence it can be easily abused unethically. Employers may use fMRI to check the condition of the potential’s employee mental health before deciding whether or not to employ him or her. This may not be ethical as the analysis of the fMRI report may reveal the employee’s personal lifestyle and other private information. Moreover, someone convicted of crimes may request for fMRI screening to prove that he or she is innocent. For instance, a woman convicted of child abuse has requested to use fMRI to justify that she is innocent (Madrigal, 2007). Before vested interests could abuse the application of brain mapping technologies for their own benefits, according to Marano (2003), standards should be set particularly by scienitists. Perhaps researchers should start thinking of who should be permitted to use brain mapping technologies and up to what extent it should be applied? Furthermore, research on these technologies is still on the primary stage, thus analysis of brain activity may not be completely accurate. Hence, it is not ready to be used globally. An organization consists of government and NGO representatives as well as scientists should be formed in order to discuss and set the standards for the application of brain mapping technologies. This organization should also be responsible on the regulations of these technologies even when they are practiced globally in the future. Brain mapping technologies may be beneficial to human in the near future. These standards and regulations are crucial in making sure unethical abuses of these technologies do not surface.
Reference:
Madrigal, A. (May 5, 2007). Woman convicted of child abuse hopes fMRI can prove her innocence. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/11/fmri_lies.
Marano, L.(June 3, 2003). Ethics and mapping the brain. Retrieved from http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/neuro/brain_mapping_ethics.htm
5 comments:
hi Lai Shan,
I don't know why you mention about the discovery of atomic particles in the past. Moreover, in my opinion, it is unsuitable "!" in an academic essay. However, in the overall view, yours is still smooth.
hello lai shan! good input on 'how criminals would use brain mapping to prove their innocence' however, if the results show that they do not posses any inclination to murder or abuse (like in your), should they be set free? in this sentence, "not applies on some technologies" should it be 'apply to' instead? anyway, nice work on your last piece. good luck in your exam and see ya!
Hi Lai Shan, you’ve done a very good job as we can see the efforts that you’ve put in. That is a very good example for the readers to think the applicability of this technology. However as this is an essay with only 300 words, I’m in the same opinion as Kim that the mention of atomic particle discovery is not necessary as it will affect your content mark. This is because you could have actually used that number of words to further elaborate your views. Anyway I like the point of setting up an organization; that is really a wonderful idea!
Dear Lai Shan, thanks for all the comments and helping hands over the semester~ ^^ I'm glad to have meet you^^ thanks for everything ^^ All the very best and good luck for your exam too~^^ go go jiayou~
The introduction about the atomic particles is perhaps too long and unnecessary. I was revising "Great Ideas in Contemporary Physics" for my exam before that, so probably, I was a little too enthusiastic about the discovery of atomic particle issue. I will avoid this mistake. Thanks!
Post a Comment