The question of whether neurotechnological progress will lead us to communicate less may well depend on your definition of communication. Sure we may speak less, but that’s not the whole picture. Neurotechnology may help us communicate more than ever. Here’s why.

Social Media

If you are a ‘less is more’ kind of person when it comes to your social media, I have possibly depressing news. Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that Facebook is currently developing a brain computer interface. This means that we are officially careening toward a world in which your Aunt Beryl will be able to post detailed updates about her prize winning geraniums with even greater ease.

Neurocontrolled technology has an amazing capacity to integrate well with what we humans do best and I think the issue we may need to be thinking about is not so much whether neurotechnology will isolate us but what strategies we will need in order to not receive messages and communications if we so desire. The emerging branch of neuroethics is tackling this issue, with a focus on the fundamental importance of preserving the right to be “alone” at times.

But there is one very basic design principle that companies like Neurogress are focusing on which helps me feel more comfortable about the possible proliferation of Aunt Beryl geranium updates; and that is that we can actually turn off. Neurogress is developing neurocontrol software that allows controlling devices with the power of our thoughts through brain-computer interfaces that are noninvasive. In other words it can be removed. For me at least, this option of entering a shared space and then stepping away from it when you need isn’t just welcome — it’s an absolute requirement.

What about art?

Communication isn’t confined merely to sharing information on social media (thank god). At the extreme opposite end of the continuum from Aunt Beryl and her geranium posts there’s the kind of communication we humans do to forge a common sense of humanity and to share what it means to be human. Neurotechnology has amazing implications for artistic expression. Take the recent experiment conducted by researchers at the University of Plymouth in which eight participants engaged in collaborative music making together. Half were able-bodied musicians while the other half were profoundly disabled and unable to move.

Neurotechnology provided an amazing creative space for these disabled musicians, introducing them to the singular experience of being able to convert their thoughts into musical notes through a brain-computer interface. Far from causing us as a species to communicate less, neurotechnology is opening up ways that we can communicate more, introducing previously silent people into the crazy, wonderful mix.

Neurotechnology has implications for music, literature, and how, on the most basic levels, reality is experienced and shared.

Ultimately, speaking may simply become the less efficient option for sharing knowledge

Neurotechnology isn’t going to cause us to communicate less. It’s not as simple as that. What it will do though is present us all with a question: what is the perfect way to share my ideas? And it looks as though there will be a colorful diversity of possible answers.

For some purposes, the physical act of speech may eventually become a fairly inefficient way of communicating. We may at times opt for a more democratic and accessible process than a clamor of competing voices and something more organic and nuanced than the occasionally depressing limitations of the written word.

Through their software and prototype development, companies like Neurogress are opening up possibilities for communication in exciting new ways. Just don’t tell Aunt Beryl!

Invest in the interactive mind-controlled devices of the future by buying tokens now. Visit Neurogress.site.