Document Type

Working Paper

Publication Date

2-6-2009

SSRN Discipline

BioRN Subject Matter eJournals; Interdisciplinary eJournals; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy eJournals; Biology Research Network; Legal Scholarship Network; Criminal Law & Procedure eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; Law & Society eJournals; Law & Society: Public Law eJournals; CSN Subject Matter eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Public Law & Legal Theory; Cognitive Science Network; Law, Brain & Behavior eJournals; Law Research Centers Papers

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 criminallaw doctrine economic decisionmaking moral decisionmaking and jurisprudence

Download

Share

COinS