|
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
Philosophical Foundations of Law and NeuroscienceMichael S. PardoUniversity of Alabama School of Law Dennis PattersonEuropean University Institute; Rutgers University School of Law, Camden; Swansea University School of Law February 6, 2009 University of Illinois Law Review, 2010 U of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 1338763 Abstract: According to a wide variety of scholars, scientists, and policymakers, neuroscience promises to transform law. Many neurolegalists - those championing the power of neuroscience for law - proceed from problematic premises regarding the relationship of mind to brain. In this Article, we make the case that their accounts of the nature of mind are implausible and that their conclusions are overblown. Thus, their claims of the power of neuroscience for law cannot be sustained. We discuss a wide array of examples including lie detection, criminal-law doctrine, economic decision-making, moral decision-making, and jurisprudence.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 40 Keywords: Neuroscience, fMRI, Mind, Brain, Mereological Fallacy, Lie Detection, Deception, Voluntariness, Intent, Knowledge, Economic Decision-Making, Moral Decision-Making, Jurisprudence, Legal Decision-Making working papers seriesDate posted: February 6, 2009 ; Last revised: August 10, 2010Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.437 seconds
