Neuroethics 4 (3):195-203 (2011)
|Abstract||In Minds, Brains, and Norms, Pardo and Patterson deny that the activities of persons (knowledge, rule-following, interpretation) can be understood exclusively in terms of the brain, and thus conclude that neuroscience is irrelevant to the law, and to the conceptual and philosophical questions that arise in legal contexts. On their view, such appeals to neuroscience are an exercise in nonsense. We agree that understanding persons requires more than understanding brains, but we deny their pessimistic conclusion. Whether neuroscience can be used to address legal issues is an empirical question. Recent work on locked-in syndrome, memory, and lying suggests that neuroscience has potential relevance to the law, and is far from nonsensical. Through discussion of neuroscientific methods and these recent results we show how an understanding of the subpersonal mechanisms that underlie person-level abilities could serve as a valuable and illuminating source of evidence in legal and social contexts. In so doing, we sketch the way forward for a no-nonsense approach to the intersection of law and neuroscience|
|Keywords||Personal/Subpersonal distinction Neuroscience Law|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Carl F. Craver (2009). Explaining the Brain. OUP Oxford.
Michael S. Pardo & Dennis Patterson (2011). More on the Conceptual and the Empirical: Misunderstandings, Clarifications, and Replies. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 4 (3):215-222.
A. M. Viens (2011). Reciprocity and Neuroscience in Public Health Law. In Michael Freeman (ed.), Law and Neuroscience. Oxford University Press.
Nicole A. Vincent (2010). On the Relevance of Neuroscience to Criminal Responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (1):77-98.
Michael Freeman (ed.) (2011). Law and Neuroscience. Oxford University Press.
Dennis Patterson (2011). Minds, Brains, and Norms. Neuroethics 4 (3):179-190.
Michael Pardo & Dennis Patterson (2011). Minds, Brains, and Norms. Neuroethics 4 (3):179-190.
Sarah Robins & Carl Craver (2011). No Nonsense Neuro-Law. Neuroethics 4 (3):195-203.
Added to index2010-07-26
Total downloads51 ( #24,357 of 722,701 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,343 of 722,701 )
How can I increase my downloads?