Emerging Technologies

What if: your brain confesses?

Image: Test person Niklas Thiel poses with an electroencephalography (EEG) cap which measures brain activity, at the Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM) in Garching near Munich. REUTERS/Michaela Rehle

Keith Breene
Senior Writer, Forum Agenda
Share:
Our Impact
What's the World Economic Forum doing to accelerate action on Emerging Technologies?
A hand holding a looking glass by a lake
Crowdsource Innovation
Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale
Stay up to date:

Emerging Technologies

Long the preserve of stage show performers and confidence tricksters, the ability to read minds has always fascinated humans. The possibility that our inner thoughts and feelings could be accessed by another is both thrilling and terrifying.

We are already at the point where some thoughts can be identified externally. So as neuroscientists decipher the workings of the brain, new questions are being raised about decoding memories and ascertaining intentions. This has obvious implications for criminal behaviour. What if neuro-evidence is invited into the courtroom?

Loading...

At the moment the technology is in its infancy and has been primarily focused on aiding communication and movement for disabled people. But the fact that scientists can already identify some words that people are thinking is an extraordinary step.

Experts in the brain decoding field acknowledge that accurate interpretations of a person’s thoughts and memories remain a long way off but there is no doubt that technology in this area is advancing steadily.

If people’s inner worlds could be accessed it would have a profound effect. Who, if anyone, would we agree to share this world with? Under what circumstances would we countenance someone’s thoughts being accessed by force?

The courtroom is always confronting new technologies in the fight against crime. Fingerprinting, so-called lie detection technology and DNA profiling were all cutting edge when first presented in evidence. All have been used countless time to convict, and indeed acquit, suspects. And brain scans are already used in evidence, in one case to successfully argue that a suspect should be spared the death penalty.

But the courtroom setting presents many potential problems when it comes to reading people’s minds. Would coaching allow a suspect to fool the technology? Would reading minds be a form of self-incrimination, something many courts allow suspects to avoid doing? And what if someone mistakenly believes they may have committed a crime?

If your brain confesses but you insist on your innocence, who can the jury trust?

Vote in the poll above and continue the conversation on Friday, January 22nd at 09:00 EST / 15:00 CET. Tune in for a livestreamed discussion on the possible, plausible and probable impacts of neuroscience disrupting the justice system at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos.

The session was developed in partnership with TIME.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

Sign up for free

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Share:
World Economic Forum logo
Global Agenda

The Agenda Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

Subscribe today

You can unsubscribe at any time using the link in our emails. For more details, review our privacy policy.

What is the 'perverse customer journey' and how can it tackle the misuse of generative AI?

Henry Ajder

July 19, 2024

About Us

Events

Media

Partners & Members

  • Sign in
  • Join Us

Language Editions

Privacy Policy & Terms of Service

© 2024 World Economic Forum