Date: 2011
Type: Article
Minds, Brains and Norms
Neuroethics, 2011, 4, 3, 179-190
PARDO, Michael S., PATTERSON, Dennis, Minds, Brains and Norms, Neuroethics, 2011, 4, 3, 179-190
- https://hdl.handle.net/1814/21822
Retrieved from Cadmus, EUI Research Repository
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.
Cadmus permanent link: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/21822
Full-text via DOI: 10.1007/s12152-010-9082-4
ISSN: 1874-5490; 1874-5504
Files associated with this item
Files | Size | Format | View |
---|---|---|---|
There are no files associated with this item. |