Minds, Brains, and Norms

25 Pages Posted: 13 Jul 2009  

Michael S. Pardo

University of Alabama School of Law

Dennis Patterson

Rutgers University School of Law, Camden; University of Surrey - School of Law

Date Written: July 10, 2009

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.

Keywords: rule following, interpretation, knowledge, ethics, morals, mens rea, insanity, lie detection, deception

Suggested Citation

Pardo, Michael S. and Patterson, Dennis, Minds, Brains, and Norms (July 10, 2009). Neuroethics, Forthcoming; University of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 1432476. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1432476

Michael S. Pardo (Contact Author)

University of Alabama School of Law ( email )

P.O. Box 870382
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487
United States

Dennis Patterson

Rutgers University School of Law, Camden ( email )

Camden, NJ 08102-1203
United States
856-225-6369 (Phone)
856-751-8752 (Fax)

University of Surrey - School of Law ( email )

United Kingdom

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
860
rank
23,765
Abstract Views
6,042
PlumX