Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct 27:15:703308.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.703308. eCollection 2021.

Neurorights in History: A Contemporary Review of José M. R. Delgado's "Physical Control of the Mind" (1969) and Elliot S. Valenstein's "Brain Control" (1973)

Affiliations

Neurorights in History: A Contemporary Review of José M. R. Delgado's "Physical Control of the Mind" (1969) and Elliot S. Valenstein's "Brain Control" (1973)

Stephan Schleim. Front Hum Neurosci. .

Abstract

Scholars from various disciplines discuss the ethical, legal, and social implications of neurotechnology. Some have proposed four concrete "neurorights". This review presents the research of two pioneers in brain stimulation from the 1950s to 1970s, José M. R. Delgado and Elliot S. Valenstein, who also reflected upon the ethical, legal, and social aspects of their and other scientists' related research. Delgado even formulated the vision "toward a psychocivilized society" where brain stimulation is used to control, in particular, citizens' aggressive and violent behavior. Valenstein, by contrast, believed that the brain is not organized in such a way to allow the control or even removal of only negative processes without at the same time diminishing desirable ones. The paper also describes how animal and human experimentation on brain stimulation was carried out in that time period. It concludes with a contemporary perspective on the relevance of neurotechnology for neuroethics, neurolaw, and neurorights, including two recent examples for brain-computer interfaces.

Keywords: brain reading; brain stimulation; brain-computer interface; mind reading; neuroethics; neurolaw.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bublitz J.-C. (2013). “My mind is mine!? cognitive liberty as a legal concept,” in Cognitive Enhancement, eds Hildt E., Franke A. (Dordrecht: Springer; ), 233–264.
    1. Danziger K. (1980). The history of introspection reconsidered. J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 16, 241–262. 10.1002/1520-6696(198007)16:3<241::aid-jhbs2300160306>3.0.co;2-o - DOI - PubMed
    1. Delgado J. M. (1963). Cerebral heterostimulation in a monkey colony. Science 141, 161–163. 10.1126/science.141.3576.161 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Delgado J. M. (1965). Sequential behavior induced repeatedly by stimulation of the red nucleus in free monkeys. Science 148, 1361–1363. 10.1126/science.148.3675.1361 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Delgado J. M. R. (1952a). Permanent implantation of multilead electrodes in the brain. Yale J. Biol. Med. 24, 351–358. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources