How Technology May Soon "Read" Your Mind

60 Minutes: Incredible Research Lets Scientists Get A Glimpse At Your Thoughts

(CBS)  But some experts question whether it's ethical to scan the brain for commercial purposes, and say neuromarketers may be promising more than they can really deliver.

"If you image my brain, and you say, 'Ah-ha! Paul craves chocolate chip cookies,' and I say, 'No, I don't,' now are you going to believe the brain over me? You can only do that if you have proven that that part of the brain lighting up means in all cases that that person desires chocolate chip cookies. And what a lot of people are doing is they're just imaging the brain, and then they're declaring what that means, and they're never proving that it actually translates into behavior," Wolpe said.

"You know it's very interesting. When you show someone a brain scan, people just believe it. It just reeks of credibility," Stahl commented.

"Absolutely. Absolutely," John Dylan-Haynes agreed.

"And you telling me, 'That's the area where people add and subtract,' I thought, 'Well, of course. He knows,'" Stahl said.

"But I could have told you anything," he pointed out.

So as brain imaging continues to advance and find its way into the courts, the market, and who knows what other aspects of our lives, one message is: be cautious. Another is to get ready. Back at Carnegie Mellon, Just and Mitchell have already uncovered the signatures in our brains for kindness, hypocrisy, and love.

"It's breathtaking," Stahl said. "And kind of eerie."

"Well, you know, I think the reason people have that reaction is because it reveals the essence of what it means to be a person. All of those kinds of things that define us as human beings are brain patterns," Just replied.

"We don't wanna know that… it all boils down to, I don't know, molecules and things like that," Stahl said.

"But we are, you know, we are biological creatures. You know, our limbs we accept are, you know, muscles and bone. And our brain is a biological thinking machine," he replied.

"Do you think one day, who knows how far into the future, there'll be a machine that'll be able to read very complex thought like 'I hate so-and-so'? Or you know, 'I love the ballet because…'?" Stahl asked.

"Definitely. Definitely," Just said. "And not in 20 years. I think in three, five years."

"In three years?" Stahl asked.

"Well, five," Just replied with a smile.

[jbarber72001]

Paul Root Wople seems to know alot more about the state of the art then he's describing on this segment. The beam of light that he's refering to is quite real and there are potential negative side effects to these kinds of scans (like blood clots and severe migraines). The real harm here is the abuse of this technology in the hands of authorities who could care less about the sanctity of our thoughts or the preservation of our constituional rights (namely the Fourth Amendment). Wealthy individuals like Jerry Jones (the owner of the Dallas Cowboys and a principal investor in this technology) could care less about the implications of the technonolgy on our lives....he stands to make alot of money from the cellular revolution that is going to occur as a result of this!
John Barber
Denver, CO

[truthislife1]

A computer should never be the deciding factor for a jury to decide guilt or innocence. Too much information can be tampered with. It's purely speculation. There can be mis-readings and it not fair to the defending party. Interesting science though.

[azure13]

Just what we need, more ways for the rich and powerful to run our lives.

Unbelievable... So many better things for scientists to be working on.

[inachu1]

I love stories like this but each and every time these mind reading technologies come out then they go hidden or surpressed or something similar.

Even in the late 1970's or early 1980's There was a TV similar to Nimoy Lenoards tv show "IN SEARCH OF" and then a pbs NOVA report on the advancement of mind reading. The machine would pop up a picture of a cat even before the man said the word noting the machine recorded the signal for the word "cat"

Also it was stated that each humans electric signal for "cat" is different in effect that is like all our brains are different operating systems and each one is unique and you can not have one machine for all minds.

[dovestar]

Maybe we'll really know if liberals think out of the left side of their brains. We already know that liberals are not in their right mind.

[dovestar]

At last! Just what medical transcriptionists need to figure out doctors' dictation. Read his mind! They already know that a doctor's speech is as bad as his penmanship. Now we'll finally know if his brain is just as scrambled.

[dovestar]

Like all technologies this one comes with a mixed bag. Imagine being able to finally communicate with a loved one who is severely mentally retarded. Imagine being able to repair those areas in their brains which caused their retardation. This is something that this technology can lead to.

And that's not all. Imagine those who have been quadrapilegic all their lives. This technology could lead to their possibly leading normal lives like the rest of us. Pretty fascinating, huh?

But as usual, we think more about the sinister possibilities, such as government using this technology to scan our brains and "reprogram" us to the ruling party's way of thinking. Sort of like that device that lets us "see" beneath a person's clothes, now being used in some airports to discover hidden weapons.
The Fifth Amendment says that a person cannot be forced to be a witness against himself. Are you being so forced if you are forced to submit to such a brain scan? Legal scholars will be arguing this one for generations.
Bottom line: we don't trust our government or anyone else for that matter that would use such technology to manipulate us. And we'd better be on our guard, for as Pogo so eloquently said, "We have met the enemy and he is us".

[atlasbuggedbyspam]

Leslie Stahl brings us an important story, yes, but also openly parades her second-rate understanding of philosophy and politics. After regaling us with evidence of how a government might use the new tool - in America, perhaps to prove innocence, and in other nations, it could as well aid murderous repression - she then shrieks: "Scary as that is, imagine a world where companies could read our minds [for marketing purposes.]" Poor Leslie - merchandisers could find out what she wants and then...offer it to her. Oh, the horror!!

[smistretta]

Everyone is over reacting. There is no chance that scientists will ever be able to use FMRI or any other technology to read people's thoughts. The scientist in the story is a materialist and materialism has been refuted.
J. B. S. Haldane said: ?If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motion of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence I have not reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms."

[apple2pie]

Nice for people who can't read non-verbal language.