Document Type
Working Paper
Publication Date
6-2-2010
SSRN Discipline
Legal Scholarship Network; Social Insurance Research Network; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; CSN Subject Matter eJournals; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; Law School Research Papers - Public Law & Legal Theory; Cognitive Science Network; Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy eJournals; Humanities Network; Law, Brain & Behavior eJournals; Law Research Centers Papers
Abstract
At the invitation of the Editors of Neuroethics we wrote an article entitled "Minds Brains and Norms" detailing our views on a variety of claims by those arguing for the explanatory power of neuroscience in matters of law and ethics The Editors invited comments on our article from four distinguished academics Walter Glannon Carl Craver Sarah Robins and Thomas Nadelhoffer and invited our reply to their critique of our views In this reply to our commentators we correct some potential misunderstandings of our views and further clarify our positions with discussions of the conceptualempirical distinction rulefollowing explanations at the personal and subpersonal levels memory and lie detection Although we acknowledge many of the criticisms advanced by our distinguished colleagues we conclude that in several important respects their criticisms confirm the points made in our original article
Recommended Citation
Michael S. Pardo,
More on the Conceptual and the Empirical: Misunderstandings, Clarifications, and Replies,
(2010).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_working_papers/289