# Minding rights: Mapping ethical and legal foundations of 'neurorights'

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.06281 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.06281/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 13 Feb 2023.

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [On using AI for EEG-based BCI applications: problems, current challenges and future trends](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.16168/) (2025)
- [Rethinking Generalized BCIs: Benchmarking 340,000+ Unique Algorithmic Configurations for EEG Mental Command Decoding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.02978/) (2025)
- [Subject-Level Heterogeneity in EEG Motor Imagery Decoding: A Large-Scale Benchmark and Portfolio-Based Reduction of the Search Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.22778/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The rise of neurotechnologies, especially in combination with AI-based methods for brain data analytics, has given rise to concerns around the protection of mental privacy, mental integrity and cognitive liberty - often framed as 'neurorights' in ethical, legal and policy discussions. Several states are now looking at including 'neurorights' into their constitutional legal frameworks and international institutions and organizations, such as UNESCO and the Council of Europe, are taking an active interest in developing international policy and governance guidelines on this issue. However, in many discussions of 'neurorights' the philosophical assumptions, ethical frames of reference and legal interpretation are either not made explicit or are in conflict with each other. The aim of this multidisciplinary work here is to provide conceptual, ethical and legal foundations that allow for facilitating a common minimalist conceptual understanding of mental privacy, mental integrity and cognitive liberty to facilitate scholarly, legal and policy discussions.