COGS200Group15

From UBC Wiki

Ideas

Put your ideas for our project here.

Human Echolocation

Cochlear implants can already give otherwise deaf people the ability to hear. But why stop there? Could we use technology to grant humans genuinely new senses, such as using something like a cochlear implant to give humans something like echolocation? Or would this simply be finding a new way to utilize a sense we already have?

This would cover comp sci (the implant and how to make it function), cognitive psych (what's happening in the brain and how to make the brain communicate with the implant) and philosophy (is the implant a genuine extension of the cognitive system / mind, or just a tool our brain uses?)

Articles

Essentially a summary of human echolocation abilities. Goes into detail about echolocation, comparisons between blind/seeing individuals, and references a lot of other studies that might be useful for our project.

Similar to the above articles; argues that echolocation is a basic perception-action ability of humans.

Not an article, but a really interesting Ted Talk on our topic. The concept of "Umvelt" is something we should consider when writing up our research proposal.

I haven't read this yet, but it looks like a promising article about the ethics of human enhancement. I'll probably read it tomorrow in my gap before class.


This is Thomas Nagel's What is it like to be a bat? paper, which is big in philosophy of mind, and what gave me the idea in the first place.

In this paper, the results and conclusions are pretty interesting. The regions of the brain that light up when echolocating are visual, not auditory. We could point part one of our research here; is this sound-through-visual-systems the same as visual experience, just with different inputs? Is it anything like hearing? Or is it it's own, genuinely distinct sensory experience? We can use computer and mechanical prosthetics to find out. Part two can be the social and ethical implications of doing so.


Proposal

Thomas Nagel’s What is it like to be a Bat? is a popular and important paper in Philosophy of Mind, presenting an argument against reductive physicalism regarding consciousness. In it, he puts forward the claim that we can know everything there is to know about the brain of a bat and still know nothing about what it is like to be a bat – in particular, what echolocation feels like subjectively. It’s not just hearing, and is nothing like sight.

We do not intend to tackle the topic of consciousness directly – this is not research into the nature of the brain-mind relation. It turns out, however, that humans do, in fact, have some rudimentary echolocation abilities. In particular, the brains of blind persons send auditory information through the visual cortex in order to navigate, and can even tell the difference between certain materials by the features present in auditory echoes.

Does this visual processing feel like sight? It uses auditory, not visual, stimuli as input, so this seems unlikely. Does it feel like hearing? This too seems quite unlikely, as the portions of the brain responsible for hearing are not used for this skill. In fact, it does not seem to feel like anything at all. Previous research suggests that this processing is done entirely subconsciously, with only vague hunches coming into conscious awareness. Is there any way to draw this experience into consciousness through the use of prosthetic enhancement? We may not know what it is like to be a bat, but perhaps we can know what it is like to experience the world via echolocation.

We would need three rounds of research for our project. First, we need to design a device similar to a cochlear implant that can catch auditory information relevant to human echolocation, isolate it, and transmit this information into the relevant parts of the brain in ways appropriate for processing. Second, we would need to run research on different methods of enhancing the brain processes behind echolocation in order to “push” these processes into conscious awareness. Third, we would need to gather data on the subjective, first-person accounts of our subjects as to what it feels like to experience this echolocation. We would need sighted or previously-sighted individuals as subjects, as blind-from-birth subjects may not have ever know what it is like to see, and may be unable to determine if the conscious experience of echolocation is qualitatively different from the experience of sight.

Further, this research has strong social and ethical repercussions. Regardless of whether or not we can design a prosthetic to enhance human echolocating skills, what are the ethical ramifications of artificial sensory enhancements in humans? Commercial production of extrasensory prosthetics would likely widen the already massive gap between the rich and the poor of the world.

This research covers the fields of cognitive psychology and computer science in trying to design a prosthetic that can convert auditory stimuli into information that can be transmitted into the brain in useable form. What, exactly, is the brain doing when it hijacks the visual cortex to process audio?

The question of what, subjectively, does echolocation feel like might have profound philosophical implications regarding sense perception and conscious experience.

Further, ethical research would be necessary before deciding what, if anything, should be done with such a device.

Final Draft (For the poster)

What

Thomas Nagel’s 1974 paper "What is it like to be a Bat?" is a popular and important paper in Philosophy of Mind. It present an argument against reductive physicalism when regarding consciousness. In it, he puts forward the claim that we can know everything there is to know about the brain of a bat but still not know anything about what it is like to be a actual bat. In particular, he looks at echolocation, and what it would feel like to echolocate. No matter how much we can objectively know about the process of echolocation, without being to echolocate ourselves, all humans can do is relate it to how they see and hear.

However, it turns out that humans do, in fact, have some rudimentary echolocation abilities. In particular, the brain of a blind persons sends auditory information through the visual cortex in order to navigate. It has been shown that it is even possible in some cases to tell the difference between certain materials by the features present in auditory echoes. This raises questions about what it feels like to echolocate. Does it feel like sight or hearing, or neither? While it uses auditory information as the stimuli, it works to create an image of what is around the subject echolocating. Previous research suggests that it feels like nothing as the entire process is entirely subconscious, and most people do not even realize that they have echolocated at all.

Currently work is being done to find a way to make the process of echolocation more conscious, so one would be able to acknowledge that there were currently using echolocation. They are doing this through a device similar to cochlear implants, but instead of running auditory stimuli to the auditory cortex of the brain, the information would be passed to the visual cortex.

Having such a device, and being able to enhance the transaction of auditory stimuli being processed by the visual cortex, will also further research into the cognitive processes of the brain. Knowing how the brain combines the different sensory modalities and how those modalities can be used in new, non-standard ways helps us understand the brain and its navigational competencies. Being able to monitor this will allow for us to get a better understanding of how the brain interprets the world around us, and help us understand how humans think and how sensory processing enters conscious awareness.

When looking into the possible repercussions of an echolocating device, we must keep in mind the distinction between replacement prosthetics, and enhancement prosthetics. For the vast majority of human history, prosthetic devices have been replacements, restoring a lost function such as the ability to walk, for example. In most cases, this replacement was vastly inferior to the natural human form - the replacement was not perfect. While better than nothing for most people, it was preferable by far to never need the prosthetic in the first place. However, modern prosthetic technology allows us not merely to replace bodily functions with artificial devices, but to enhance them. Weightlifters with cutting-edge prosthetic legs can outperform able-bodied athletes. This is not merely a continuation of the human quest to alleviate the pain of loss of limb, but a wholly new category of technology use. Now, one might actually be better off losing their legs or arms in a horrific accident and have them replaced with superior mechanical parts - and since not many reputable doctors of the modern day would be willing to lop off a perfectly healthy arm in order to provide science-fiction-sounding enhancements, people with healthy limbs simply don't get the opportunities afforded to the maimed, who would have their replacement/enhancements at least partially funded out of public healthcare spending. The implications of widely-accessible human enhancement technology will profoundly shape the future of our societies.

Assuming a device that enable human to echolocate is ever made; along with determining if echolocation does in fact feel different from the other senses, we are interested in looking into the ethical and metaphysical concerns of having a device that allows for humans to echolocate. Who should have access to this device? Should it be used only by those who cannot already see? What are the consequences of the upper class being able to buy a new sense that the rest of society cannot afford? What does it mean for humans if we can start mechanically updating ourselves? Should there be a limit on what upgrades are allowed? And, when do we stop being human, and become machines instead? When do we stop being persons?

How

We would need four rounds of research for our project. First, we need to design a device similar to a cochlear implant that can catch auditory information relevant to human echolocation, isolate it, and transmit this information into the relevant parts of the brain in ways appropriate for processing. In order to do this, we will utilize deaf-from-birth patients who currently echolocate, and by using an EEG cap we can track the electrical signals as they travel from the ear to the visual cortex of the brain. One we better understand this process, we can find ways of “inserting” the prosthetic system into this electrical chain, much like a cochlear implant does with the auditory systems of the brain, and integrate our prosthetic into the cognitive system utilized by echo-locating persons.


Second, we would need to run research on different methods of enhancing the brain processes behind echolocation in order to “push” these processes into conscious awareness in sighted persons. Again using EEG caps, we can try different methods, different settings over long-term trials, in order to train the brain to make use of these signals. By placing seeing subjects in a dark room for extended periods of time and asking them to complete rudimentary navigation tasks using only sound, we can study how quickly they learn to use auditory stimuli to navigate. The rooms would have to be randomized so as to ensure memory is not playing a part in the improvement process, and these tests would have to be consistent, every day or close to it, to ensure the brain retains the echo-locating skills it acquires. We do not expect to see any improvement in adults except perhaps in the long term, but in young persons such as teens or children we anticipate slow, but steady, improvement in spatial awareness and navigation tasks when using only auditory stimuli, translated through our echolocation-assisting prosthetic.


Third, we would need to gather data on the subjective, first-person accounts of our subjects as to what it feels like to experience this echolocation. This would be achieved through a standardized survey, given after the subject has achieved a certain level of mastery in spatial and navigational tasks through echolocation, and may be given again after further experience, to see if the experience has changed. Subjects would not have any prior knowledge of the questions being asked the first time around, so that we can gather data about their unreflected-upon experience. For follow-up surveys, prior knowledge and expectation on the part of the subject may introduce confounding variables, but while this may involve unwanted bias or behaviour, it may also introduce some clarity in follow-up surveys, as subjects now know “what to look for” in their own minds, and may narrow down on the subjective experiences more relevant to our research. We would need sighted or previously-sighted individuals as subjects, as blind-from-birth subjects may not have ever know what it is like to see, and may be unable to determine if the conscious experience of echolocation is qualitatively different from the experience of sight.

Fourth, we would create a wider survey (for example, over SurveyMonkey) to find out what those in wider society think about the ethical and metaphysical concerns that come with an echolocation device. Questions would include: Should humans find ways to create new, previously unexperienced senses? Would you be willing to pay for mechanical updates that enhance the human senses? Should intelligent robots have the same rights as humans? Would you feel you needed an enhancement if a relevant portion of the population had the enhancement? Would you consider not having the enhancement to be an unfair disadvantage?

The responses to these survey questions would then be analyzed with the help of the DataCracker analysis tools. Once the answers to the original survey are analyzed, additional surveys could be created to look more in depth on issue where participants answers seem to have more variation.

Additionally, we canvas a variety of legal and ethical experts, in particular those working in biomedical fields, for short papers arguing in favour of, or opposition to, our prosthetic device, to be published alongside our own research.

Why

There are instrumental and philosophical benefits to this research, but these must be tempered by ethical and social considerations. Research into human echolocation might give us a prosthetic to aid blind persons in safely and accurately navigating the world. Being able to develop a device that can allow for humans to consciously echolocate, will provide aid to blind persons so they will be able to have some form of reliable navigation, which will help them move safely through the world in their day to day life. Regardless of whether it feels the same as seeing or any other sense, having this device will benefit by being a sight replacement.

The phenomenological data gathered in the process would be of value to psychology and philosophy. The question of what, subjectively, does echolocation feel like might have profound philosophical implications regarding sense perception and conscious experience, and learning what, exactly, the brain is doing when it hijacks the visual cortex to process auditory stimuli is directly relevant to the field of cognitive psychology.

However, this research has strong social and ethical repercussions. Looking into the ethical concerns will allow for us to begin to determine whether the device should be as an enhancement to human biology. With the advancement of technology, looking into the ethics behind how far humans should be able to enhance themselves, as well as who could and who should be able to enhance themselves. If this device were to go in to mass commercial production, the wealthy, who already have an advantage in our society, will now be able to use their wealth to purchase brand new senses not even available to other people, vastly widening the gulf between rich and poor.

Further ethical research would be necessary before deciding what, if anything, should be done with such a device.

Hypothesis / Predictions

We suspect our trials to take quite a long time, as we slowly train people to use this prosthetic device to navigate. We also anticipate little success in adult subjects, but greater degrees of success in teens and children, whose brains are still developing and can more easily take advantage of novel information. The younger they start making use of this prosthetic and the longer they train with it, the stronger we expect the effect to be, and the more likely that it will feel like anything at all to consciously experience echolocation.

We believe that, assuming a device that allows for humans to consciously echolocate is made, most people would be in support of using it as a replacement for sight in blind persons. We also believe that while most humans would be in support of using it as an enhancement device, most will be concerned about being put at a disadvantage by not wanting or not being able to use such a device. It may become the norm, such that refraining from, or being unable to, enhance yourself with brand new sensory modalities puts one at a severe disadvantage in society. Businesses will have incentive to hire only those with physical and cognitive enhancements over those who are not enhanced in this way.

Regarding the concern about the impact on over-enhancing to a point where humanity is questioned, we believe that most people will not have this issue regarding the addition of one single device, but that it may be a concern later on, when many potential upgrades exist. Where is the tipping point? We believe this question will be of serious concern to the general public, and may cause backlash against an echolocation prosthetic, as unlike a cochlear implant, this is not replacing a currently existing human function, but creating a whole new sense for people to experience.

Whether such a device can be successfully designed is dependent on how future technological advancements. But we predict, that given enough time, the knowledge needed to create such a device will exist, and it should be possible to use such tools to redirect auditory stimuli into the visual cortex to be processed resulting in a form of echolocation.

We expect that this technology will not be fully invented for some years. Due to this time gap, observations of the results and determining the usefulness of the auditory-visual cognitive connections, cannot occur until after such a device has been tested; however, the responses to the ethical surveys will be of a more immediate use for determining what people think about potential human enhancements as technology improves.

Reasoning

We decided to go about formatting our research project in this way as it allowed for us to look into the ethical and metaphysical issues of human enhancement of a device that has no yet been made. While we do go into some details about a possible process for creating an echolocating devices, as well as to benefits of being able to monitor the cognitive process of echolocation, our main focus is on the philosophical aspects of such a device.

We used this project as a way to look more into ethical concerns that are beginning to become more relevant now that technology is advancing past replacements, and into enhancements. The effects of bodily enhancement are going to increase as time goes on, as will the effects of such enhancement on society in general, and we want to be sure the creation and potential commercialization of our prosthetic can be justified.

What Was Learnt

Through this process, we learnt how psychology, computer science, and philosophy are interrelated when it come to thinking about future human enhancements. We also developed skills to help us present our ideas to others in a way that can be understood. The field of human enhancement is fraught with ethical pitfalls.

Annotated Bibliography

This paper was written by Fritz Allhoff, a student from Western Michigan University, and Patrick Lin, a student from California Polytechnic State University. The paper addresses the issue of un-restricted human enhancement, and ultimately show that the arguments for un-restricted human enhancement are not yet strong enough to support themselves. As we are looking into the possibility of humans being enhanced to gain the ability of echolocations, this paper is useful for our project because it shows that there should be restrictions on how humans are artificially enhancing themselves.

  • Chalmers, D. J. (2014). Uploading: A Philosophical Analysis. In Blackfor, R. & Broderick D. (Eds.), Intelligence Unbound: The Future of Uploaded and Machine Minds (102-118). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.

David Chalmers is Professor of Philosophy at the Australian National University, with a main interest in philosophy of mind. This essay has a focus on consciousness and the uploading of the human brain from a biological form to a computational system. This is important for our project as it raises questions about personal identity when non-biological devices are added to human brains. While just finding a way for human to be able to echolocate is not a complete upload, it is a step towards human brains becoming computers.

  • Clark, Andy & Chalmers, David J. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis 58 (1):7-19.

Where does the mind stop and the rest of the world begin? This is the question that kicks off this paper by philosophers Andy Clark and David Chalmers, and the answer they give is simple, but provocative; cognitive processing is not entirely brain bound. If the extended mind hypothesis is true, than we are not merely making a tool to aid human echolocation, but literally integrating a prosthetic into the mind, not merely the brain, of the subject.

  • Kolarik, Andrew J, et al. “A Summary of Research Investigating Echolocation Abilities of Blind and Sighted Humans.” ScienceDirect, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378595514000185.

A summary of human echolocation abilities. Establishes that both blind and seeing individuals can use echolocation given the right training and environment. Generally, normally sighted individuals do poorer compared to blind individuals. Helps in understanding the overall concept of echolocation and how it can be applied to humans.

  • Nagel, Thomas. “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” The Philosophical Review, vol. 83, no. 4, 1974, pp. 435–450. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2183914.

Thomas Nagel's What is it like to be a bat paper. A significant paper in philosophy of mind, and related to our project. What is it like to experience echolocation? Does this help answer the question posed in the title of Nagel's paper?

  • Stroffregen , Thomas A, and John B Pittenger. “Human Echolocation as a Basic Form of Perception and Action.” Ecological Psychology, vol. 7, no. 3. Taylor and Francis Online, www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15326969eco0703_2.

Argues that echolocation is a basic perception-action ability of humans. Analyzes various data and research to establish both blind and sighted individuals are capable of perceiving properties of distant objects with great precision. Explains briefly the technical side of echolocation (ie. echoes and acoustic pulses).

  • Thaler L, Arnott SR, Goodale MA. Neural Correlates of Natural Human Echolocation in Early and Late Blind Echolocation Experts. Burr DC, ed. PLoS ONE. 2011;6(5):e20162. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020162.

Related to the Kolarik "Summary of Research Investigating Echolocation Abilities of Blind and Sighted Humans", this paper by Thaler, Arnott, and Goodale explores the neural correlates of echolocation in the brain, narrowing this cognitive process down into the visual cortex, at least among blind individuals.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=COGS200Group15&oldid=483058"