IP: 1984 draws closer.: The Lie Detector That Scans Your Brain

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: "PAUL JULIEN" <p.julien () worldnet att net>
> To: <farber () cis upenn edu>
> Subject: The Lie Detector That Scans Your Brain
> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:37 -0500
>
>
>
> Dave:
> 1984 draws closer.
>
> NY Times Magazine 12-9-2001
> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/09/magazine/09LIEDETECTOR.html
>
> Paul Julien
>
> *
>
> December 9, 2001
> The Lie Detector That Scans Your Brain
> By CLIVE THOMPSON
>
>
> The police have tried for years to get into the heads of criminals. But the
> accuracy of polygraphs, which measure pulse rates and blood pressure, has
> frequently been questioned - since steely-nerved liars can quell these
> physiological cues. Now a new technique called ''brain mapping'' promises to
> add a new (if creepy) weapon to crime fighting: a device that can scan the
> brain of suspects and hunt for incriminating thoughts.
>
> The idea of monitoring brain waves isn't new. Scientists have long known
> that certain recognizable waves occur when people are surprised, pleased or
> frightened. But recently the technique has become much more precise. At
> Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, a company in Fairfield, Iowa, the chief
> scientist, Lawrence Farwell, interrogates suspects by checking their EEG's
> for ''P300 waves.'' These waves are produced when the brain encounters words
> or images that it recognizes; thus the police, Farwell claims, can present a
> suspect with information that only a criminal would know and see if the
> brain recognizes it.
>
> Farwell's technique recently shot to prominence when he scanned Terry
> Harrington, a convicted murderer trying to win a new trial. Harrington's
> brain did not betray recognition images from the crime scene but did react
> to scenes from his alibi - which suggested he was actually innocent. Still,
> the technique remains controversial, and many have argued it could be as
> faulty as the polygraph (though the judge in the Harrington case accepted
> the brain scan as evidence, he turned down the appeal for a new trial).
> Farwell's strategy also raises longstanding cognitive questions about the
> fickle nature of memory. Just because someone doesn't remember crime-scene
> details doesn't mean he or she is innocent.
>
> Yet the brain mappers are undeterred. Some are taking mind-reading even
> further - arguing that they will soon be able to recognize the brain waves
> emanated by guilty thoughts and catch terrorists in the act of merely
> meditating on potential crime. John Norseen, a scientist with Lockheed
> Martin, is often able to discern when subjects are thinking of particular
> numbers. He predicts that by 2005, brain mappers will be able to
> automatically scan the skulls of everyone going through airports to search
> for potential hijackers.
>
> The civil liberties implications of that prospect are unnerving to many:
> thoughts are not crimes. But after the Sept. 11 attacks, the F.B.I. and
> C.I.A. are taking a closer look at brain mapping. And the Department of
> Defense is helping finance Norseen's research. If such efforts succeed, we
> might soon see the arrival of genuine thought police.

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/