Thomas Nadelhoffer, Stephanos Bibas, Scott Grafton, Kent Kiehl, Andrew Mansfield, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & Michael Gazzaniga
|Abstract||In this paper, our goal is to (a) survey some of the legal contexts within which violence risk assessment already plays a prominent role, (b) explore whether developments in neuroscience could potentially be used to improve our ability to predict violence, and (c) discuss whether neuropredictive models of violence create any unique legal or moral problems above and beyond the well worn problems already associated with prediction more generally. In Violence Risk Assessment and the Law , we briefly examine the role currently played by predictions of violence in three high stakes legal contexts: capital sentencing ( Violence Risk Assessment and Capital Sentencing ), civil commitment hearings ( Violence Risk Assessment and Civil Commitment ), and sexual predator statutes ( Violence Risk Assessment and Sexual Predator Statutes ). In Clinical vs. Actuarial Violence Risk Assessment , we briefly examine the distinction between traditional clinical methods of predicting violence and more recently developed actuarial methods, exemplified by the Classification of Violence Risk (COVR) software created by John Monahan and colleagues as part of the MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence . In The Neural Correlates of Psychopathy , we explore what neuroscience currently tells us about the neural correlates of violence, using the recent neuroscientific research on psychopathy as our focus. We also discuss some recent advances in both data collection ( Cutting-Edge Data Collection: Genetically Informed Neuroimaging ) and data analysis ( Cutting-Edge Data Analysis: Pattern Classification ) that we believe will play an important role when it comes to future neuroscientific research on violence. In The Potential Promise of Neuroprediction , we discuss whether neuroscience could potentially be used to improve our ability to predict future violence. Finally, in The Potential Perils of Neuroprediction , we explore some potential evidentiary ( Evidentiary Issues ), constitutional ( Constitutional Issues ), and moral ( Moral Issues ) issues that may arise in the context of the neuroprediction of violence.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Robert L. Holmes (2001). A Western Perspective on the Problem of Violence. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 11:193-205.
Vinit Haksar (2012). Violence in a Spirit of Love: Gandhi and the Limits of Non-Violence. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15 (3):303-324.
Johanna Oksala (2012). Foucault, Politics, and Violence. Northwestern University Press.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2008). Media Violence and Freedom of Speech: How to Use Empirical Data. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11 (5):493-505.
Chung-Ying Cheng (2001). Philosophy of Violence From an Eastern Perspective. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2001:181-185.
Kai Nielsen (1981). On Justifying Violence. Inquiry 24 (1):21 – 57.
Manfred S. Frings (1990). Violence. Philosophy and Theology 5 (1):65-72.
Added to index2010-11-21
Total downloads32 ( #37,872 of 549,037 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,037 )
How can I increase my downloads?