Knowing the Mind from Brain Data: The Challenge of Prediction and the Fairness of Relying on Objective Data about the Mind

This article is the second in a series examining the ethical and social implications of inferring mental states from brain data. It considers two main topics. First, it discusses the challenges of extending inferences from present brain activity to mental states and from there to future mental states or behaviors. There is a risk of compounded errors when multiple inferential models are applied sequentially; harmful outcomes for minority groups underrepresented in statistical models could result. In addition, predictions based on brain data may create self-fulfilling prophecies, reinforcing neuroessentialist beliefs that undermine personal agency. Second, the paper discusses how concerns related to epistemic injustice might arise when mental states are inferred from brain data. In particular, it asks if it is just to privilege “objective” brain-based conclusions over individuals’ subjective self-reports. While brain-based evidence could empower some people to prove their claims, it may also exacerbate credibility gaps and social biases. The article concludes that careful, context-specific assessments are essential before brain-based inferences are adopted in socially significant decisions.