The following text is about neuroethics.
Brain scanning technologies raise novel questions about mental privacy. Functional neuroimaging can now identify with increasing accuracy what subjects are thinking about, whether they are lying, or what decisions they will make—sometimes before subjects themselves know. While current technology remains imperfect, improving accuracy poses ethical dilemmas. Should employers or courts use brain scans? What about security screening? The asymmetry is significant: our thoughts have always seemed—and perhaps should remain—uniquely our own. Yet legally, mental privacy lacks the protections afforded speech or physical privacy, leaving neurotechnology in an unregulated space.
What ethical gap does the text identify regarding brain scanning?
Mental privacy is better protected than physical privacy
Mental privacy lacks legal protections comparable to other forms of privacy
Brain scanning technology is completely useless
Employers are prohibited from using any technology
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. "Legally, mental privacy lacks the protections afforded speech or physical privacy, leaving neurotechnology in an unregulated space."
- Evidence: Mental privacy lacks protections; unregulated space.
- Reasoning: Other privacies are protected, but not thoughts.
- Conclusion: Legal gap exists for mental privacy.
Choice A is incorrect because the opposite is true. Choice C is incorrect because technology is "improving accuracy." Choice D is incorrect because the text asks whether they should use it, implying they can.