Ethics

On the Philosophical Foundations of Law & Neuroscience (Goldberg)

By Daniel Goldberg

Via the Professor comes word of an important new paper authored by Michael S. Pardo and Dennis M. Patterson, entitled Philosophical Foundations of Law and Neuroscience.  Here is the 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.

Given the lively discussion on exactly these matters we've had over the last 10 days here on N&L Blog, I would think this paper is both timely and important.  While I am less familiar with Pardo's work, I know Patterson's work very well, as he is one of the more important philosophers of law and the preeminent authority on Wittgenstein and the law.  I am quite excited to read this paper, and will update this post with my thoughts after doing so.

Full post as published by Neuroethics and Law on February 10, 2009 (boomark / email).