Sunday, August 13, 2006


Reader response was mixed about whether it was OK for some institutions to use magnetic-resonance imaging as an alternative form of lie-detector test.

Margaret Blum of Orange, Calif., strongly disapproves.

"Companies that want the business will possibly be less than honest about effectiveness and other information," Blum writes. "People should beware."

Others feel that the practice is permissible.

"Advances in technology will always be utilized by some," writes Philip Alexander of Windsor, Ontario. "Is it not better for all of us to fully understand what the capabilities and limitations of such developments are, as contrasted with banning their use and depriving ourselves of that insight?"

Finally, Chris Beale of Columbus, Ohio, asks: "If you do not have anything to hide, why oppose it?"

Check out other opinions at or post your own by clicking on "comments" below.

Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of "The Right Thing: Conscience, Profit and Personal Responsibility in Today's Business" (Smith Kerr, 2006), is an associate professor at Emerson College in Boston, where he teaches writing and ethics. He is also the administrator of, a Web log focused on ethical issues.

Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to or to "The Right Thing," New York Times Syndicate, 609 Greenwich St., 6th floor, New York, N.Y. 10014-3610.

No comments: