Minds, Brains, and Norms

Neuroethics 4 (3):179-190 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Arguments for the importance of neuroscience reach across many disciplines. Advocates of neuroscience have made wide-ranging claims for neuroscience in the realms of ethics, value, and law. In law, for example, many scholars have argued for an increased role for neuroscientific evidence in the assessment of criminal responsibility. In this article, we take up claims for the explanatory role of neuroscience in matters of morals and law. Drawing on our previous work together, we assess the cogency of neuroscientific explanations of three issues that arise in these domains: rule-following, interpretation, and knowledge. We critique these explanations and in general challenge claims as to the efficacy of the neuroscientific accounts

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,221

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-06-30

Downloads
99 (#160,568)

6 months
3 (#439,232)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Dennis Patterson
University of Surrey

References found in this work

Ontological relativity and other essays.Willard Van Orman Quine (ed.) - 1969 - New York: Columbia University Press.
The Concept of Mind.Gilbert Ryle - 1949 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 141:125-126.
Epistemology Naturalized.W. V. Quine - 1968 - In Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.

View all 18 references / Add more references