Monday, March 12, 2007

The Fashions of the Times: Neurolaw

The sort of scholarship that Jeffrey Rosen describes will give the study of law and neuroscience a bad name. See Jeffrey Rosen, The Brain on the Stand (March 11, 2007).

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.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

In a letter to the NYTimes (March 25, 2007) Emilio Bizzi, M.D., of
McGovern 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."