August 27, 2003
Do Humans Have A Right To Erase Their Memories?

Over on the Brain Waves blog Richard Glen Boire is arguing for the unlimited right to erase one's memories.

The right to cognitive liberty posits that the power to enhance, erase, or otherwise modify one’s own memory ought to be an individual decision; something that is neither compelled nor prohibited by laws. While some people will undoubtedly make poor decisions with regard to modifying their own memories, it should not be a crime to modify your own thinking processes. Government may rightfully police our actions, but it does not, and should not, have the power to police our minds.

I would argue that in order for people to be granted full rights they must be held responsible to maintain cognitive competence and sufficient memory recall abilities to provide sufficient support to the proper functioning of the legal system and of society as a whole. For instance, suppose someone witnesses a brutal murder and can identify the person who commited a crime. Does that person have a right to go home afterward and erase that memory? Or suppose someone commits a crime. Does that person have a right to erase that memory? Imagine someone taking a lie detector test and being able to truthfully state that they have no memory of having raped someone because they conveniently had that memory erased.

Widespread memory erasure would allow a person to claim no memory of making a verbal contract. It would also make it difficult for, say, white collar crime prosecutors to trace a complex trail of fraud if perfectly innocent unknowing tools of the fraud had the memory of their last bank back office job erased because they didn't want to remember the drudgery that the job entailed.

There are aspects of how our minds work that are essential for the proper functioning of a rights-based society. The exercise of some kind of modification of the brain that undermines the ability to make a rights-based society work can not itself be an unlimited right. The biggest challenge facing us with mind engineering is that it will eventually become possible to modify minds in a number of ways to create sentient beings that are highly rational but which behave in ways that make the continued existence of a rights-based society highly problematic.

By Randall Parker at 2003 August 27 05:52 PM  Dangers Mind Engineering | TrackBack

Comments
Paul Banks said at August 30, 2003 11:36 PM:

Wouldn't, from a legal standpoint, memory erasure be a not-so-insignificant first step towards the slippery slope on legal suicide mountain? That is, to reverse course, isn't suicide the single greatest act of will: the negation of will? Is memory erasure suicide lite? Would it lead to full on, legally enshrined suicide rights?

For example, if will, perhaps in the vein of Hegel's notion of geist, can be shown to encapsulate many things, one being your memories, wouldn't legal erasure eventually give you the right to erase your memory any way you see fit, including suicide?

Admittedly, this is somewhat of a stretch, but from a determinist's point of view, disconnecting one's self from all that you experienced would essentially remove the only elements that make up self*. Would we not then be enshrining the right to remove yourself? How could the connection between memory removal and suicide be avoided?

*self = the end result of infinite numbers of influences that determine "decision" made in life

Paul Banks
Washington University in St. Louis School of Law

Patrick said at August 31, 2003 03:56 PM:

Paul,
Perhaps the opposite would be true. With the ability to wipe all past memory, there is no longer any justification for suicide, and so social perception of it may make it LESS permissible.

After all, a society in which anyone can just wipe themselves blank and join the peace corps (or whatever) is one in which there is no sympathetic reason for killing yourself.

Kind of like stealling a loaf of bread to feed your family. With universal welfare, this got a lot less sympathy than it used to.

Paul Banks said at August 31, 2003 04:44 PM:

Very good point; my worry is that while both our hypo.s are plausible, the one I posit is more likely just looking at our national trend, for the most part, or relaxing laws against acts that used to be considered mortal sins. In short, if this impacted suicide in any way, regardless of how logical your stance is, I think it is more likely to move towards allowance (perhaps as part of the living will/right to die push that already exists) rather than a more prohibitive stance.

Interesting point though...

Paul Banks
Washington University in St. Louis, School of Law

Stephen Adkins said at September 2, 2003 06:48 AM:

Say a person committed a crime, and used memory erasure as a way to "cover their tracks".
One can not confess to, or implicate one's self in, a crime of which all knowledge has been erased. What would it be like to be tried and proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to be guilty of a crime of which you have no knowledge or memory? Would it be ethical on the court's part to convict an individual who obviously committed the crime, but has no knowledge of it? Isn't this the same a convicting one who is mentally unfit to stand trial?

Mitch Sommers said at September 2, 2003 07:39 AM:

Say a person committed a crime, and used memory erasure as a way to "cover their tracks".
One can not confess to, or implicate one's self in, a crime of which all knowledge has been erased. What would it be like to be tried and proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to be guilty of a crime of which you have no knowledge or memory? Would it be ethical on the court's part to convict an individual who obviously committed the crime, but has no knowledge of it? Isn't this the same a convicting one who is mentally unfit to stand trial?

In criminal law, voluntary intoxication is no defense to having committed a crime (except for the limited case of the intoxication preventing someone from having formed the requisite level of intent to begin with, like, say premeditiation in a homicide case). If you drank too much and were committing a crime while in a blackout phase (and yes, it can happen), that wouldn't be a defense even now. I don't see anything different merely because of the order in which the drug was taken.

Luddite said at September 2, 2003 07:45 AM:

There are some things scientists just shouldn't do... wouldn't it be better still if we never had to answer this question?

Eric E. Coe said at September 2, 2003 09:00 AM:

I don't know how realistic the idea of just taking a drug to delete old memories is. It brings up the issue of addressability (unless you are talking about a total brain wipe - and yes, that should be considered equivalent to sucide/murder). Dimming memories while they are being converted from short-term to long-term, of course, is very possible now (don't bogart that joint!) - but it works because the general process of forming long-term memories is what is being interfered with.

In general, to address existing long-term memories will probably require computer-brain interfacing at a high semantic level to be done right. This is because such memories are entangled with the rest of the personality, and affect/cause other actions/memories to happen/be formed. So they would have to be edited, substitute false memories implanted, the storyline be made consistent, etc. Not simple.

But on the other hand, if we have such a technology, then the ehethical dilemma will admit to technological solution - backups! I.e. of you don't like a memory, then you can delete it - but you must back it up first. And you can be required to temporarily restore it to give legal testimony (or maybe supply a copy of the backup to the court as an affidavit).

Bob said at September 2, 2003 09:00 AM:

Stephen,

Memory erasure would certainly render an individual unable to assist in their own defense.

Mitch,

A person who suffered permanent brain damage due to a self-inflicted injury might be ruled incompetent to stand trial regardless whether an intoxicant caused the injury.

Luddite,

No. I disagree with your position. Technology and science are morally and legally neutral. Laws limit the use of science and technology. The law must progress to account for advances in science and technology, and it always has. The law will have to progress to account for memory erasure should it become a viable technology. I agree with Randall that prohibition, whether restricted or universal, makes well-reasoned sense.

Bob said at September 2, 2003 09:03 AM:

Eric,

I agree that the law might allow memory erasure if the information is not destroyed. Perhaps the crime is permanent memory destruction.

Laston said at September 2, 2003 10:00 AM:

what happens when a court forces a person to undergo a treatment that IMPROVES his memory? "I can't recall" would no longer be a valid answer

Bob said at September 2, 2003 10:49 AM:

Laston,

In the US, chemically improved memory will not override the rule against forced self-incrimination.

Paul Banks said at September 2, 2003 10:57 AM:

Also, the improved memory in trials would still be just treated as relative... think about it this way, what is the difference if people became twice as big as they are now? In the scheme of things, not much; I think that a memory doubled in strength, especially if it became standard, would just become the norm, and would not have much technical bearing as first glance might say.

Paul

Bob said at September 2, 2003 01:47 PM:

Great, now my next Job Offer will be contigent upon agreeing to have all work experiences "erased" upon termination.

Um, what was I saying?

Bob said at September 3, 2003 06:09 AM:

It just occured to me that we may have been thinking about a guilty person trying to evade punishment earlier. What about an innocent person who erases some memory and then becomes accused?

Suppose someone drops the ball on your surprise birthday party and you obligingly have some memory erased to preserve the surprise. As you walk out of the clinic, someone slaps handcuffs on you and starts asking all sorts of questions you cannot answer. Questions like: Why did you have some memory erased? Where were you yesterday afternoon? Why did we find your DNA in the victim's home?

You ask for a lawyer. The lawyer asks: Why did you have some memory erased? Where were you yesterday afternoon? Why did they find your DNA in the victim's home?

You might have an excellent alibi that you cannot remember and that your lawyer will never find on his own. It seems to me that some sort of offline backup would be required, but then that raises the issue of self incrimination. Would the backup be admissable in court?

Bob said at September 3, 2003 11:06 AM:

The idea of the offline backup causes me some concerns too. Presumably, if one can restore memories from some offline backup, one can construct memories by faking a backup and then insert them using the restore process.

No alibi? No problem! Just tamper with someone's backup and subpoena him as a witness.

Rich Rostrom said at September 3, 2003 08:59 PM:

In the story _The Day The Past Went Away_, Robert Silverberg considered what would it mean for society if amnesia could be induced by a drug. It could mean, for instance, that people could shake off the burdens of unbearable grief, trauma, or guilt. A couple could agree to forget the quarrels that started them on the road to divorce. A child could forget being molested. Would this be good? Possibly.

Bob said at September 4, 2003 05:50 AM:

Rich,

The problem of a work of fiction is the author's ability to focus on some consequences to the exclusion of other consequences. Every new technology brings unintended consequences.

Bob

Zack Lynch said at September 8, 2003 02:00 PM:

For those interested, the debate is continued at http://www.corante.com/brainwaves/20030901.shtml#51336 . I'm looking forward to Randall's dissection in future posts.

Invisible Scientist said at September 9, 2003 01:25 PM:

But how about spies who temporarily erase their
memories in order to make their new false personalities
100 % genuine? These brainwashed futuristic "zombie-agents" will
become even more dangerous in 25 years.

Joe said at December 13, 2003 11:01 AM:

I WOULD ERASE MY MEMORY IF I COULD.... PLEASE HELP.

shailendra panwar said at July 23, 2004 09:11 PM:


dear sir
i read your comment but you donot specify how we can erase the memory.
please tell me about that

your friend
shailendra panwar

Melina Krumova said at November 8, 2004 12:55 AM:

I want to erase my memory.Help me if there is a way.Please

Sheryl Bautista said at February 6, 2005 09:24 PM:

Is it really possible to erase one's memory? If it is, Can you please send me the process? Thanks!!!

Estrada said at April 25, 2005 12:53 PM:

I think that if there was a drug that had the ability to erase past/unwanted memories I would defently buy it. I have ha many past memories that have and til this day haunt me and I have been hoping that someone would create a drug or fomula where it gave you the ability to erase unwanted memories. I can not move on with my life because I am haunted by these memories. I can not wait til these drugs are out so I can finally move on with my life.

John said at August 31, 2005 04:01 AM:

I figured out how to erase part of my memory. Due to part of my memory erased I do not know how I did it so I can not help you.

Missi Moroni said at September 10, 2005 02:59 AM:

I need help to erase Marc David Gonzalez. Please help me find out a way to get him out of my memories!!!

Andy said at September 11, 2005 09:15 AM:

Surely he wasn't that bad ?

Laurel McLaughlin said at October 17, 2005 11:38 AM:

Say that there is someone that is mentally ill and they have some reoccuring memory that may have in fact been the cause of their psychological problems. If in that case, they should have the right to erase that part of thier memory so they will be able to have a normal life and not have to be burdened with the past that they were forced to endure.

Laurel McLaughlin said at October 17, 2005 11:39 AM:

Say that there is someone that is mentally ill and they have some reoccuring memory that may have in fact been the cause of their psychological problems. If in that case, they should have the right to erase that part of thier memory so they will be able to have a normal life and not have to be burdened with the past that they were forced to endure.

Julianne McKinney said at January 31, 2006 08:42 PM:

Erasing your memory to obliterate your role in the commission of a crime would be a waste of time. You have the legal right not to incriminate yourself. It is the prosecutor's duty and responsibility to prove the state's case against you, while you sit there "mum." Your memory and testimony is not required. The evidence stands on its own.

Now, on the other hand, if you wanted to run a nazi-style death camp, where you find it difficult coping with your memories of what you did to the prisoners, memory erasure might be a suitable alternative to drinking yourself into a blissful state of dissociation.

What do you recommend as an effective procedure? Self-lobotomization with an ice pick. Electroshock compliments of your local friendly shrink?

Rebecca said at February 14, 2006 11:00 PM:

This is more of an opinion site than a therapy session but if anyone would know how to help me it would be people such as you who are in contact with the information that could help. I have thought about this for a long time. Two years in fact and I am beyond desperate, I am actually pleading for help. If any one knows of a place to go to erase a memory PLEASE let me know. I agree that you learn from your experiences that is what has made me who I am today,however I want to move on with my life and yet I can't. I've tried hypnosis and to no avail, my will was to strong to relax and take the suggestions. Everything in me wants to move on but everytime I think okay, I'm better I slide back. Yes I am young, 27, and most will think time will heal all but dear lord it has been two years and my heart still feels like it is being ripped out of body. My mistake was being in a relationship with my best friend of 3 yrs. In one big blow I was hospitilized, lost our baby, lost my true love and my best friend. I want to date again but I can't I have this wall that even I can't penetrate I have no faith or self esteem anymore. God has heard plenty of times from me! I would do almost anything to forget this unbearable pain. I want to enjoy my life, I want to believe in love again. If ANYONE knows something or rather someone that practices in memory removal PLEASE let me know. Please. Thank You, Rebecca

Veil said at February 27, 2006 02:22 PM:

If you go back to the old manchurian candidate and mk ultra stories it is entirely possible to erase any memory at will by transfering it to an alternate personality and create a second personality in a person by simple brainwashing

Greg said at February 28, 2006 12:37 PM:

I too would love to erase certain memories. I've been suffering from a mental illness for over 3 years, which has completely ruined my life. I am unable to leave the house and haven't been outside for about 6 months. I'm looking for a way to remove the memories which is keeping me in this state and get my life back to normal.

Memry said at March 20, 2006 06:24 PM:

Is there a way to do this thorugh psychotherapy or hypnosis?

Jewel said at March 27, 2006 03:59 PM:

For those of us like myself who are truly suffering erasing memory would be a great idea. If this were possible, I would do it in a minute. I was fine all my life but a recent mental breakdown within the last 2 years left me with recurrent thought and phobia. I am tortured every minute of the day with my thoughts. I cannot recover. I have tried all medications and psychotherapy to no avail. What should I do? I am considering ECT, but only for memory erasure. I do not want the brain damage. But I think all this talk is a lot of hogwash. If you contact the researchers on this, they tell you straight out that they don't have any procudure or pill to erase your memory, so I do not understand why they hint that they do. It seems all they have at this point is a medication which they "think" can reduce the intensity of the memory.

I just keep praying that they do come out with a safe procedure, be it medication or other means to remove a span of memory in your brain. If ECT can do it, why can't doctors do it. In the meantime I will suffer and wait and hopefully some nuerosurgeon or scientist will think of something to cure those of us truly suffering and considering ending our lives. Some of us truly need to forget.

Theresa said at January 22, 2007 04:48 PM:

ECT treatments done by a badly trained doctor...can and will erase your memory.

smiler said at April 14, 2008 05:09 PM:

For those of you suffering mental and psychological problems ELECTROSHOCK THERAPY erases memory. Memory impairment is the worst side effect of electroshock Therapy. Some say you forget the things which you need to forget. I have had it and I know that I have lost memory of the arriage and other problems which caused me to have the therapy.

odd69 said at November 14, 2008 06:22 AM:

what if u could construct a false memory to replace the one erased?and if so,anyones memory would be suspect,who's to say ur memories are real or not?A super manipulator could do anything they wanted in this scenario,would anything make sense anymore?And would morality make sense anymore if u have been tampered with,or a group of people in a conspiracy?would make for an interesting book i say,

Post a comment
Comments:
Name:
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

                       
Go Read More Posts On FuturePundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©