David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Neuroethics 4 (2):175-178 (2011)
This is a report on the 3-day workshop “The Neuroscience of Responsibility” that was held in the Philosophy Department at Delft University of Technology in The Netherlands during February 11th–13th, 2010. The workshop had 25 participants from The Netherlands, Germany, Italy, UK, USA, Canada and Australia, with expertise in philosophy, neuroscience, psychology, psychiatry and law. Its aim was to identify current trends in neurolaw research related specifically to the topic of responsibility, and to foster international collaborative research on this topic. The workshop agenda was constructed by the participants at the start of each day by surveying the topics of greatest interest and relevance to participants. In what follows, we summarize (1) the questions which participants identified as most important for future research in this field, (2) the most prominent themes that emerged from the discussions, and (3) the two main international collaborative research project plans that came out of this meeting.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Joshua Greene & Jonathan Haidt (2002). How Does Moral Judgment Work? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6 (12):517-523.
Stacey A. Tovino (2007). Functional Neuroimaging and the Law: Trends and Directions for Future Scholarship. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (9):44 – 56.
Heidi L. Maibom (2008). The Mad, the Bad, and the Psychopath. Neuroethics 1 (3):167-184.
Marga Reimer (2008). Psychopathy Without (the Language of) Disorder. Neuroethics 1 (3):185-198.
Citations of this work BETA
Daniel Pallarés-Dominguez & Elsa González Esteban (forthcoming). The Ethical Implications of Considering Neurolaw as a New Power. Ethics and Behavior:1-15.
Similar books and articles
Laura Day (2002). 'Putting Yourself in Other People's Shoes': The Use of Forum Theatre to Explore Refugee and Homeless Issues in Schools. Journal of Moral Education 31 (1):21-34.
Conrad Vincent Fernandez, Shaureen Taweel, Eric D. Kodish & Charles Weijer, Disclosure of Research Result to Research Participants: Needs and Attitudes of Adolescents and Parents.
Cynthia Griggins, Christian Simon, Frederick Nakwagala & Rebecca Pentz (2011). Bioethics Training in Uganda: Report on Research and Clinical Ethics Workshops. [REVIEW] HEC Forum 23 (1):43-56.
Paul Thagard (2005). How to Be a Successful Scientist. In M. Gorman, R. Tweney, D. Gooding & A. Kincannon (eds.), Scientific and Technological Thinking. Erlbaum 159--171.
José A. Cruz & William J. Frey (2003). An Effective Strategy for Integrating Ethics Across the Curriculum in Engineering: An ABET 2000 Challenge. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (4):543-568.
Linda L. Street & Jason B. Luoma (2002). Control Groups in Psychosocial Intervention Research: Ethical and Methodological Issues. Ethics and Behavior 12 (1):1 – 30.
Katherine A. Brading & Elena Castellani, About the Oxford Symmetry Workshop and the Papers Posted Under That Heading.
Nicole A. Vincent (2010). On the Relevance of Neuroscience to Criminal Responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (1):77-98.
Added to index2010-06-19
Total downloads42 ( #94,304 of 1,789,800 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #420,681 of 1,789,800 )
How can I increase my downloads?