Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
It is said that everything is interconnected to each other in the universe, and Artificial Intelligence (AI), a “spider” domain that will be found “in all and everything”, demonstrates to us every day this need for unlimited thinking, interference, interconnection and integration “of all disciplines, eras and minds”. Consciously or not, we are “immersed” in a new reality, in a kind of “whirlwind” of globalization, interconnectedness, transdisciplinarity, innovation and the fulminant evolution of technology, which we often try to slow down or at least to understand its meaning, to accept it and to enter openly into its sphere of action, because this is the way, this is our future, of humanity. The evolution of technology is seductive. But what about the essence of humanity, the inner ego, the aura or the energy field, elements untouched by the legislative area, but only by that of science? What about artificial intelligence that makes vulnerable mind and mental integrity through the impermissible alteration of thoughts, which can alter, remove or recover people’s memories, as well as manipulate their thoughts? In this context, through this study we propose an inter-and transdisciplinary dialogue, through which to discover possible foundations of potential new human rights, neurorights and the right of the soul in response to the unprecedented advance of artificial intelligence. Thus, we aim to open a new time space for analysis and in globo vision on the human being and its rights, contributing to the completion of the universe of institutional and legal proposals and mutations already started at international level. It requires a mosaic approach and the courage to resize the “legal architecture” regarding human rights, through which the legislator to attach special importance to the spiritual area of the human being, the road being already opened through the current inter- and transdisciplinary doctrinal debates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ilie et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: