Enslaving Minds: On Freedom of Thought and the Exploitation of Mental Vulnerabilities.

IF 3.7 4区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Neuroethics Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-08 DOI:10.1007/s12152-025-09620-6
Sjors Ligthart
{"title":"Enslaving Minds: On Freedom of Thought and the Exploitation of Mental Vulnerabilities.","authors":"Sjors Ligthart","doi":"10.1007/s12152-025-09620-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One central principle often derived from the right to freedom of thought (RFoT) is that persons' inner thoughts shall not be impermissibly altered. Since a clear definition of 'impermissible alteration' of thought is lacking, the meaning and scope of this principle are largely uncertain. Scholars are now exploring how to operationalise the notion of 'impermissible alteration' of thought. For this, some have appealed to the concept of 'manipulation', proposing that mind interventions plausibly infringe the RFoT if they are manipulative. This paper argues that the appeal to manipulation is unpersuasive. It explores the potential of the distinct notion of exploitation, which is, unlike manipulation, an international legal concept that underpins absolute prohibitions in human rights law.</p>","PeriodicalId":49255,"journal":{"name":"Neuroethics","volume":"18 3","pages":"48"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12594718/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-025-09620-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One central principle often derived from the right to freedom of thought (RFoT) is that persons' inner thoughts shall not be impermissibly altered. Since a clear definition of 'impermissible alteration' of thought is lacking, the meaning and scope of this principle are largely uncertain. Scholars are now exploring how to operationalise the notion of 'impermissible alteration' of thought. For this, some have appealed to the concept of 'manipulation', proposing that mind interventions plausibly infringe the RFoT if they are manipulative. This paper argues that the appeal to manipulation is unpersuasive. It explores the potential of the distinct notion of exploitation, which is, unlike manipulation, an international legal concept that underpins absolute prohibitions in human rights law.

奴役思想:论思想自由和对心理弱点的利用。
思想自由权(RFoT)经常衍生出的一个核心原则是,人的内在思想不应被允许改变。由于对思想的“不允许的改变”缺乏明确的定义,所以这一原则的意义和范围在很大程度上是不确定的。学者们现在正在探索如何将思想的“不允许的改变”这一概念付诸实践。为此,一些人诉诸于“操纵”的概念,提出如果思想干预具有操纵性,就有可能侵犯rft。本文认为,诉诸操纵是没有说服力的。它探讨了剥削这一独特概念的潜力,与操纵不同,剥削是一个国际法律概念,是人权法中绝对禁止的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuroethics
Neuroethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuroethics is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to academic articles on the ethical, legal, political, social and philosophical questions provoked by research in the contemporary sciences of the mind and brain; especially, but not only, neuroscience, psychiatry and psychology. The journal publishes articles on questions raised by the sciences of the brain and mind, and on the ways in which the sciences of the brain and mind illuminate longstanding debates in ethics and philosophy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书