International Law

Skepticism about Neuroscience

Image via Wikipedia

The Law and Magic blog points out a paper skeptical about the explanatory power of neuroscience.

"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.

Keywords: Neuroscience, fMRI, Mind, Brain, Mereological Fallacy, Lie Detection, Deception, Voluntariness, Intent, Knowledge, Economic Decision-Making, Moral Decision-Making, Jurisprudence, Legal Decision-Making."

It is highly unlikely that a relatively new investigation which at its basic level looks at correlates of blood activity in the brain with hypothesized mental states is at a satisfactory level of explanation to displace developed law. Here is the paper, which is skeptical about neuroscience.

Full post as published by Misleading Advertising Law on February 26, 2009 (boomark / email).