An interesting news report regarding the newly formulated scientific term “thought identification” which is a clausal phrase which implicitly hides its true reality, which is none other than “mind reading”.
Uploaded by BadKitty. – Up-to-the minute news videos.
I know non Muslims like I know my own hand. There will be much of a breach into the arena of oppression rather than the door of justice, and the devils reality is that it will market this oppression in the name of justice, just as they have done with the “war on terror”, only on a much more massive scale involving the whole populace of entire societies wallahul-alim.
My personal opinion, it may be able to reveal experience, but with intention, there is a major flaw to it. In fact, I predict (if Allah wills for this to go forward) that this entire field will affect many sectors of human legislation resulting in hundreds and maybe thousands of government policies worldwide, and the greatest and most controversial arena in this whole field would most likely be the “intention” factor, more so than the experiential factor or the interpretation of thoughts.
A few Intellectual Criticisms to Note
1. The final deduction he made, about the idea being eerie because it tells us human nature is nothing but chemical reactions, is completely biased. Just because our thoughts can be recognised in brain-patterns, doesn’t mean that our thoughts in essence are nothing more than brain-patterns. They still haven’t found the exact causality, they only know that activity in regions is correlated with certain thoughts. It could be the activity causing the idea, or the idea causing the activity, or both being caused by something else.
2. There is another aspect of philosophical science that delves into the aspects of language shaping our very thought and logic. A much more informative analysis can be accessed here “Language Shaping our Thought” to see what we are referring to. So how does this necessarily correlate with the above related pseudo science. As the study shows regarding language, the very thought patterns of various human ethnic backgrounds can dramatically affect the very thought pattern of specified individuals. That would by default entail that due to regional languages of the world, it would complicate the issue of mind reading astronomically and would present a challenge to the matter of mind reading. Just having a read into the scientific deductions of language shaping our thoughts would clearly demonstrate to the reader the complexity of the matter signifying that mind reading in practice cannot be universal unless machines were going to take into account all of these subtle difference in thought patterns of various ethnic groups of the world.
3. the Moral Debate- the debate regarding the intricacies of this pioneered science would be astronomical universally throughout world governments, that is, those who merely entertain the idea. From criminal law to business and economics, and even to international espionage, this thing will spark a whole new realm of morality, structure and even civilizational existence.
The thing that stems from the moral debate is simply the utter and total misuse of it. For example, in one extraction of the news, it revealed that it can access imagery of what a person has seen. Adding to that, in another part, the other scientist said it can detect where a person has been, like an al-qa’ida camp. Okay great. However, what that translates to in covert espionage language is that they can grab a Muslim who may have seen a glimpse of an al-qa’eda camp on some obscure website, and then charge them for actually being an al-qa’eda member.
Another example, is the issue of love and hate, and other sentiments which one of the scientist was discussing. to what extent will the right to hold information have. How will this affect marriages. This mere scientific accomplishment is a snowball effect of virtually millions of legal, political, and international affairs that could result from this
4. Intention- I would be a strong critic and denier in the ability to actual interpret intentions. This issue itself will be the very core of the entire moral debate, the right of our individuality to individuality. The articulation of our intention other than our own will completely strips individuality. However, we believe in Islam that no man can “know” the intentions of another. We have full conviction in this. They will never be able to correctly identify intentions in their proper context and they may only be able to present some considerable evidences, but nothing more.
We are not arguing the fact that there can be some benefit derived of this technology, but the question I would simply ask is “at what cost”?