Protecting the Mind: An Analysis of the Concept of the Mental in the Neurorights Law


  • Pablo Lopez-Silva Universidad de Valparaiso
  • Raúl Madrid Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile



neurotechnologies, neurorights, mind, agency, mental intromission


After examining some of the most fundamental aspects of the general concept of ‘neuroright’ in the current discussion, this paper analyzes the concept of ‘the mental’ contained in the very first law of neurorights in the world currently under discussion in the Senate of the Republic of Chile (Bulletin 13.828-19 of the Chilean Senate). It is claimed that the lack of specificity of the target notion might not only posit difficulties for the creation of specific legal frameworks for the protection of subjects from potential misuses of neurotechnologies with access to neural data, but it might also make very difficult the process of decision-taking when interpreting the law.


Alivisatos AP, Chun M, Church GM, Greenspan RJ, Roukes ML, Yuste R (2015) A national network of neurotechnology centers for the brain initiative. Neuron, 88(3), 445-448.

Alivisatos, A.P., Chun, M., Church, G.M., Deisseroth, K., Greenspan, McEuen, P., R.J, Roukes, M. L., Sejnowski, T.S., Weiss, P. and Yuste, R. (2013). The Brain Activity Map. Science, 339, 1284-1285.

Alivisatos A.P., Chun, M., Church, G.M., Greenspan, R.J., Roukes, M.L., Juste, R. (2012). The brain activity map project and the challenge of functional connectomics. Neuron, 74(6), 970-974.

Andrews, A., Weiss, P. (2012). Nano in the brain: nano-neuroscience. ACS Nano, 26(10), 8463-8464.

Bennett, M.R., Hacker, P.M.S. (2003), Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience. London: Blackwell.

Bublitz, J.C. (2022). Novel Neurorights: From Nonsense to Substance. Neuroethics, 15(7), 1-15.

Chalmers, D. (1996). The Conscious Mind. Oxford: OUP.

Chaudhary, U., Birbaumer. N., Ramos-Murguialday, A. (2016). Brain-computer interfaces for communication and rehabilitation. Nature Reviews Neurology, 12(9), 513-525.

Collecchia G. (2021). Neurotecnologie e neurodiritti digitali: la privacy mental. Recenti Prog Med., 112(5), 343-346.

Craig, J.N. (2016). Incarceration, Direct Brain Intervention, and the Right to Mental Integrity – a Reply to Thomas Douglas. Neuroethics, 9, 107-118.

Crane, T. (1998). Intentionality as the Mark of the Mental. En A. O’Hear (Ed.), Contemporary Issues in the Philosophy of Mind, 229-252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dresler M., Sandberg A., Bublitz C., Ohla K., Trenado C., Mroczko-Wąsowicz A., Kühn S., Repantis D. (2019). Hacking the Brain: Dimensions of Cognitive Enhancement. ACS Chem Neurosci, 10(3), 1137-1148.

Espay, A.J., Bonato, P., Nahab, F. et al (2016). Technology in Parkinson disease: challenges and opportunities. Mov Disord, 31(9), 1272-1282.

Facebook Reality Lab (2020). Imagining a new interface: Hands-free communication without saying a word. Disponible en

Fernández, A., Nikhil, S., Gurevitz, B., Olivier, O. (2015). Pervasive neurotechnology: A groundbreaking analysis of 10,000+ patent filings transforming medicine, health, entertainment and business. San Francisco: Sharp Brains.

Fourneret É. (2020). The Hybridization of the Human with Brain Implants: The Neuralink Project. Camb Q Healthc Ethics, 29(4), 668-672.

Gobierno de España (2021). Documentado para Consulta -Carta de Derechos. Disponible en

Göering, S., Klein, E., Specker-Sullivan, L. et al. (2021). Recommendations for Responsible Development and Application of Neurotechnologies. Neuroethics, 14, 365-386.

Hempel, C. (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Ienca, M. (2017). Preserving the Right to Cognitive Liberty. Scientific American, 317(2), 10-10.

Ienca, M. (2015). Neuroprivacy, neurosecurity and brain-hacking: Emerging issues in neural engineering. Bioethica Forum, 8(2), 51-53.

Ienca, M., Andorno, R. (2017). Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sci Soc Policy, 13 (5).–017–0050–1

Jackson, F. (1986). What Mary Didn’t know. The Journal of Philosophy, 83(5), 291-295.

Kellmeyer, P. (2021) Big brain data: On the responsible use of brain data from clinical and consumer directed neurotechnological devices. Neuroethics, 14, 83-98.

Lavazza A (2018) Freedom of thought and mental integrity: the moral requirements for any neural prosthesis. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 12.

López-Silva, P. (2022). The Concept of Mind in the Neuroprotection Debate. In López-Silva, P. & Valera, L. (Eds.). Protecting the Mind: Challenges in Law, Neuroprotection, and Neurorights, pp. 9-18. Amsterdam: Springer.

López-Silva, P., Valera, L. (2022). Protecting the Mind: Challenges in Law, Neuroprotection, and Neurorights. Amsterdam: Springer.

López-Silva, P., Madrid, R. (2021). Sobre la conveniencia de incorporar los neuroderechos en la constitución o en la ley. Revista Chilena de Derecho y Tecnología, 10(1), 53-76.

López-Silva, P. (2019). Preocupaciones Neuróticas sobre la Neuroprotección y la Construcción de Leyes. Conferencia: ‘Es hora de los neuroderechos? 3 de Octubre, Centro de Innovation, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.

Lowe, E.J. (2003). An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Makin, J.G., Moses, D.A. y Chang, E.F. (2020). Machine translation of cortical activity to text with an encoder-decoder framework. Nature Neurosciences, 23, 575-582.

McFarland, D.J. (2020). Brain-computer interfaces for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Muscle Nerve, 61(6), 702-707.

Ministerio de Justicia de la República de Chile (2021). Código Civil. Santiago: Editorial Jurídica de Chile.

Nadal, M. (2020). Inteligencia artificial y ‘seudonimato’: el Gobierno presenta la primera versión de la Carta de Derechos Digitales. El País. Disponible en

Nagel, T. (2013). Mind y Cosmos. Oxford: OUP.

Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat?. Philosophical Review, 83,435-456.

Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (2014). Gray Matters. Integrative Approaches for Neuroscience, Ethics and Society, vol. 1. Washington, DC: Bioethics Commission.

Quaglio, G. et. al. (2021). The International Brain Initiative: Enabling Collaborative Science. The Lancet Neurology, 20(12), 985-986.

Pugh, J., Pycroft, L., Maslen, H., Aziz, T., Savulescu, J. (2018). Evidence-based neuroethics, deep brain stimulation and personality-deflating, but not bursting, the bubble. Neuroethics, 14(Suppl 1), 27-38. 392-5

Senado de la República de Chile (2022). Boletín Nº 578/SEC/21. Disponible en

Senado de la República de Chile (2020). Boletín 13.828-19. Disponible en

Shein, F. (2013). Neuroscience, Mental Privacy, and the Law. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 36(2), 653-713.

Skinner, B.F. (1974). About Behaviorism. New York: Vintage.

Smith, D. (2013). Why Spend a Billion Dollars to Mao the Human Brain? The Atlantic. Disponible en

Sommaggio, P., Mazzocca, P., Gerola, A., Ferro, F. (2017). Cognitive liberty. A first step towards a human euro-rights declaration. BioLaw Journal, 3, 27-34.

Yuste, R. (2020a). Si puedes leer y escribir la actividad neuronal, puedes leer y escribir las mentes de la gente. El País.

Yuste, R. (2020b). Can You See a Thought? Neuronal Ensembles as Emergent Units of Cortical Function. IBM Distinguished Speaker Series.

Yuste, R. (2019). Everyone has the right to neuroprotection. Interview in ‘Columbia Neuroright Initiative’.

Yuste, R. et al (2017). Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI. Nature, 551(7679), 159-163.

Watson, J. (1930). Behaviourism. Norton: New York.

Wajnerman-Paz, A., López-Silva, P. (2022). Mental Privacy and Neuroprotection: An Open Debate. In López-Silva, P. & Valera, L. (Eds.), Protecting the Mind: Challenges in Law, Neuroprotection, and Neurorights, pp. 141-155. Amsterdam: Springer.

Zuñiga-Fajuri, A., Miranda, L. Miralles, D. et al. (2021). Neurorights in Chile: Between neuroscience and legal science. In M. Hevia (Ed.), Regulating Neuroscience: Transnational Legal Challenges, pp. 165-179. Amsterdam: Elsevier.



2022-12-01 — Updated on 2022-12-02

How to Cite

Lopez-Silva, P., & Madrid, R. (2022). Protecting the Mind: An Analysis of the Concept of the Mental in the Neurorights Law. Revista De Humanidades De Valparaíso, (20), 101–117.



Monographic Section