It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Mind reading, Brain fingerprinting and the Law = NeuroLaw

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 05:05 PM
More on Brain fingerprinting...

An Iowa firm called Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Inc., is positioning its EEG-based brain-state analysis system as a potential tool in the fight against terrorism. The device, consisting of a headband sensor, EEG amplifier, and computer-based signal processor, attempts to detect whether a subject or suspect has had prior association with specific words, images, or other stimuli.

In a test conducted with the FBI, the system was able to accurately identify FBI agents based on their brain wave responses when presented with relevant terms compared to irrelevant stimuli. In a similar manner, Farwell says the system could help intelligence agencies differentiate an innocent Afghani student from a member of a terrorist cell.

The brain fingerprinting system works by presenting to a subject relevant words, phrases, or pictures that would only be known by a perpetrator of an act. The subject wears a headband with sensors that measure the EEG from several locations on the scalp. Farwell has defined a response known as a MERMER, memory and encoding related multifaceted electroencephalographic response, which is derived from the EEG data at different sites. The main component of a MERMER is the P300 wave, an evoked response that has been well studied in the scientific literature as a potential indicator of recognition. The MERMER response is not present in subjects who lack specific knowledge about the word, phrase, or picture presented.

More Here

[edit on 22-1-2010 by LadySkadi]

posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 07:10 PM
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

In no way do I intend to present this research and "future" technology and its possible/probable uses as solely benign and just. I think it is clear that the potential can be positive/negative depending on its use. The very fact that Brain fingerprinting project is funded by the CIA, FBI and Navy would suggest its importance and relevance in both lights, agree?

Ethical questions are arising as fast as the research is moving... Scientists, Academics, and many others are questioning the "use" of the research as much as they are excited about the potential...

For those who questioned whether the Courts would accept Brain fingerprinting results... the video above clearly demonstrates that at least once, it was. It can be expected that as tests continue, the likelihood that more Judges will allow evidence review...

[edit on 22-1-2010 by LadySkadi]

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 07:10 PM
Interesting PDF ... worth the look


Questions to Ponder (Last Slide)

I. Privacy:
Do we have an absolute or relative right to cognitive privacy? Forensics, Security,
Civil, School, Parental -- for what and on whom will it be used? Will we allow covert
use? Who will assume what roles in deciding if the technology is accurate, safe,
proper? Courts, legislature, psychologists, legal scholars, ethicists?

II. Clinical Care
What do we mean by “normal brains” as we manipulate and alter our brain
chemistry? How might we expand our ideas of brain function as we integrate
information technology into our neural circuitry?

III. Human Enhancement
How much are we willing to change our ways of thought, feeling, and perceiving?
How do we balance ideals of selfhood from ethics, religion, and cultural traditions
with ideas of progress and individual liberty?

IV. The Nature of Selfhood:
Will the new neurotechnologies threaten our current conceptions of selfhood,

[edit on 26-1-2010 by LadySkadi]

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in