Reading Minds

The topic of mind reading seems to be a continual area of interests. Of course, there are a few factors to consider in this movement. The first of which is outside the realm of ethics, and questions whether or not such technology would even be possible. The age of exploration is far from over. Part of this journey, I would assume, would tap into the deep levels of consciousness that remain, as of now, undiscovered. The fact that we do not understand, in its completeness, the way the mind works, leads me to question the validity of the ethics of this potential technology. On one hand, I do not believe this particular technological advance is beyond the reach of humanity; and thus, I believe we will one day need to seriously question our motives at the advent of its discovery. On the other side of the spectrum, it has been suggested that our culture cannot compete with technological advances. Remembering Idhe's philosophy, we cannot approach technology with the question "can it be controlled?"; instead, we must acknowledge the real issue of "can we control ourselves?" This draws us into more ethical issues. The ethics of reading minds is something that partially humors me. Imagine the response from one receives from a group of people (perhaps two or three) who suddenly realize that their intimate conversation has been invaded by you. I have read some of the posts and the issue of privacy has always come forward. Our thoughts, our feelings, our fears, our desires; they are all ours to have and no one else. Another issue is that of community. My faith directs my call to remind others that people are ends in themselves and part of the body as a whole. This delicate balance can only be held while recognizing the dignity of every human life. I would maintain that this involves every aspect of human life, especially our thoughts. The episode of Robot Stories involving mind scanning still has an effect on my viewing of this situation. One character conveyed that notion that it would be illegal not to go through the procedure. Why? This cannot just be viewed as a political problem. The philosophical concerns are prevalent, but also the theological concerns of religious authorities. The characters exhibited greed. There was a deeper need that lay beneath their motives, which hid their pride. They could not stand the thought of being without someone in their "collective". I could foresee the same problem with any advance in technology that would lead to further our ability to read minds. I do not believe that we could inevitably limit ourselves. Inevitably, every man, woman, and child would be called to join in this new creation - "a brave new world." And I could foresee the persecution of those who would not conform, leading to an ever downward spiral. For the sake of tolerance, humanity often becomes intolerant. My main objection centers on the loss of individuality. The action of becoming less than human, taking place by any means that emphasizes we are means to an end, and not ends in ourselves. We are part of the whole, but that identity should never over arch this position.