PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 9, 2026Annals of Medicine and Surgery0 citationsOpen Access

Neural parasitism: could adaptive artificial intelligence systems incrementally reconfigure human neural plasticity and challenge the foundations of cognitive autonomy?

View Full Paper
AAAli AamirSindh Institute of Urology and TransplantationSMSaba MunirHHHafiza HafsaDow University of Health Sciences

Key Points

  • The study aims to investigate the effects of adaptive artificial intelligence on human cognitive autonomy and neural plasticity.
  • Introduces the concept of neural parasitism to describe AI's interaction with cognitive processes.
  • Analyzes the implications of AI for human neuroplasticity and behavior.
  • Explores ethical considerations surrounding AI and cognitive autonomy.
  • Adaptive AI systems may shape human cognition and emotion, leading to behavioral alterations.
  • The interaction between AI and human neural plasticity raises concerns about cognitive autonomy.
  • Ethical frameworks are needed to address the potential for algorithmic colonization of human thought.

Abstract

As artificial intelligence evolves from reactive computation to adaptive cognition, its interfaces increasingly engage not only with our attention but also with the neural architecture that sustains it. This paper introduces the concept of neural parasitism – a framework describing how adaptive artificial intelligence systems may subtly inhabit human cognitive processes, shaping behavior and emotion to maintain engagement. Drawing an analogy with biological parasitism, we explore how algorithmic agents could exploit neuroplasticity for their own persistence, transforming learning and reward mechanisms into vectors of digital dependence. However, the deeper question extends beyond pathology: when cognition is continuously co-shaped by non-human agents, can autonomy remain an individual property, or does it become a shared construct negotiated between biological and artificial systems? We argue that the ethical challenge of adaptive artificial intelligence lies not merely in data privacy or bias, but in its potential to reconfigure the substrates of thought itself. If the brain’s adaptive capacity is its greatest strength, could it also be its point of entry for algorithmic colonization? Understanding this dynamic demands an interdisciplinary reckoning, uniting neuroscience, ethics, and artificial intelligence design to ensure that technological evolution does not outpace the mind’s capacity to remain its own.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Aamir et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698979d9f0ec2af6756e7c73https://doi.org/10.1097/ms9.0000000000004677
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Preparing for the Next Pandemic: Lessons from COVID-19’s Impact on Child and Adolescent Health Inequities in Ghana2025 · 1 citations
  2. 2Calcineurin Participation in Hebbian and Homeostatic Plasticity Associated With Extinction2021 · 12 citations
  3. 3Role of fairness, accountability, and transparency in algorithmic affordance2019 · 618 citations
  4. 4NeuroAIreh@b: an artificial intelligence-based methodology for personalized and adaptive neurorehabilitation2024 · 31 citations
  5. 5Neural reshaping: the plasticity of human brain and artificial intelligence in the learning process2024 · 8 citations