Criminal Responsibility and Neuroscience: No Revolution Yet

Frontiers in Psychology 10 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Since the 90’s, neurolaw is on the rise. At the heart of heated debates lies the recurrent theme of a neuro-revolution of criminal responsibility. However, caution should be observed: the alleged foundations of criminal responsibility (amongst which free will) are often inaccurate and the relative imperviousness of its real foundations to scientific facts often underestimated. Neuroscientific findings may impact on social institutions, but only insofar as they also engage in a political justification of the changes being called for, convince populations, and take into consideration the ensuing consequences. Moreover, the many limits of neuroscientific tools call for increased vigilance when, if ever, using neuroscientific evidence in a courtroom. In this article, we aim at setting the basis for future sound debates on the contribution of neuroscience to criminal law, and in particular to the assessment of criminal responsibility. As such, we provide analytical tools to grasp the political and normative nature of criminal responsibility and review the current or projected use of neuroscience in the law, all the while bearing in mind the highly-publicized question: can neuroscience revolutionize criminal responsibility? Answering this question implicitly requires answering a second question: should neuroscience revolutionize the institution of criminal responsibility? Answering both, in turn, requires drawing the line between science and normativity, revolution and dialogue, fantasies and legitimate hopes.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,168

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Criminal Responsibility.Victor Tadros - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Legal and moral responsibility.Antony Duff - 2009 - Philosophy Compass 4 (6):978-986.
Canadian Scholars on Criminal Responsibility.Stephen P. Garvey - 2015 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 9 (2):351-364.
On Blaming and Punishing Psychopaths.Marion Godman & Anneli Jefferson - 2017 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 11 (1):127-142.
Criminal Responsibility.Ken M. Levy - 2019 - In Robert D. Morgan (ed.), SAGE Encyclopedia of Criminal Psychology. Sage Publishing. pp. 269-272.
Will There Be a Neurolaw Revolution?Adam Kolber - 2014 - Indiana Law Journal 89:807-845.
Iv-answering for crime.R. A. Duff - 2006 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 106 (1):87-113.
Neurolaw: Neuroscience, Ethics, and Law. Review Essay.Gerben Meynen - 2014 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (4):819-829.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-06-28

Downloads
42 (#380,447)

6 months
6 (#528,006)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Valérian Chambon
Institut Jean Nicod

References found in this work

Freedom of the will and the concept of a person.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1971 - Journal of Philosophy 68 (1):5-20.
The Illusion of Conscious Will.Daniel M. Wegner - 2002 - Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Minds, Brains and Science.John R. Searle - 1984 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Freedom of the will and the concept of a person.Harry Frankfurt - 2004 - In Tim Crane & Katalin Farkas (eds.), Metaphysics: a guide and anthology. Oxford University Press UK.
Effective intentions: the power of conscious will.Alfred R. Mele - 2009 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 61 references / Add more references