Minds, Brains, and Norms
Michael S. Pardo
University of Alabama School of Law
European University Institute; Rutgers University School of Law, Camden; Swansea University School of Law
July 10, 2009
University of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 1432476
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.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 25
Keywords: rule following, interpretation, knowledge, ethics, morals, mens rea, insanity, lie detection, deceptionAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: July 13, 2009
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.500 seconds