There seems to be something about the legal mind that sometimes just cannot resist facile practical conclusions -- and ill-considered theoretical ones -- produced by the sciences of man [yes, I know I'm retrograde -- but I use "man" in the generic sense and I think every reader understands that] and the mind.
In a letter to the NYTimes (March 25, 2007) Emilio Bizzi, M.D., of
ReplyDeleteMcGovern Institute For Brain Research wrote:
"The consensus view among the neuroscience, legal and ethics experts who presented papers is that one should be careful not to invest too much faith in the capacity of brain imaging to reveal individuals’ true motives and motivations; it is far from the silver bullet for law enforcement, prosecutors or defense attorneys that its champions claim."