Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Blame, Desert and Compatibilist Capacity: A Diachronic Account of Moderateness in Regards to Reasons-Responsiveness.Nicole A. Vincent - 2013 - Philosophical Explorations 16 (2):1-17.
    This paper argues that John Fischer and Mark Ravizza's compatibilist theory of moral responsibility cannot justify reactive attitudes like blame and desert-based practices like retributive punishment. The problem with their account, I argue, is that their analysis of moderateness in regards to reasons-responsiveness has the wrong normative features. However, I propose an alternative account of what it means for a mechanism to be moderately reasons-responsive which addresses this deficiency. In a nut shell, while Fischer and Ravizza test for moderate reasons-responsiveness (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Impact of Neuroscience and Genetics on the Law: A Recent Italian Case.M. Farisco & C. Petrini - 2012 - Neuroethics 5 (3):317-319.
    The use of genetic testing and neuroscientific evidence in legal trials raises several issues. Often their interpretation is controversial: the same evidence can be used to sustain both the prosecution’s and defense’s argument. A recent Italian case confirms such concerns and stresses other relevant related questions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • On the Stand. Another Episode of Neuroscience and Law Discussion From Italy.Michele Farisco & Carlo Petrini - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (2):243-245.
    After three proceedings in which neuroscience was a relevant factor for the final verdict in Italian courts, for the first time a recent case puts in question the legal relevance of neuroscientific evidence. This decision deserves international attention in its underlining that the uncertainty still affecting neuroscientific knowledge can have a significant impact on the law. It urges the consideration of such uncertainty and the development of a shared management of it.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Neurolaw and Direct Brain Interventions.A. Vincent Nicole - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (1):43-50.
    This issue of Criminal Law and Philosophy contains three papers on a topic of increasing importance within the field of "neurolaw"-namely, the implications for criminal law of direct brain intervention based mind altering techniques. To locate these papers' topic within a broader context, I begin with an overview of some prominent topics in the field of neurolaw, where possible providing some references to relevant literature. The specific questions asked by the three authors, as well as their answers and central claims, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Restoring Responsibility: Promoting Justice, Therapy and Reform Through Direct Brain Interventions. [REVIEW]Nicole A. Vincent - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (1):21-42.
    Direct brain intervention based mental capacity restoration techniques-for instance, psycho-active drugs-are sometimes used in criminal cases to promote the aims of justice. For instance, they might be used to restore a person's competence to stand trial in order to assess the degree of their responsibility for what they did, or to restore their competence for punishment so that we can hold them responsible for it. Some also suggest that such interventions might be used for therapy or reform in criminal legal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Medical Responsibility and Clinical Guidelines: A Few Remarks From Two Italian Juridical Cases.Carlo Petrini & Michele Farisco - 2012 - Medicine Studies 3 (3):157-169.
    PurposeThe aim of this paper is to assess the complex issue of responsibility in clinical practice. The paper focuses mainly on the relationship between personal- and medical-professional responsibility of practitioners and clinical guidelines.MethodsAfter a theoretical review of the different definitions of responsibility in selected bioethical and biojuridical literature, two recent juridical proceedings concerning medical responsibility from Italian Courts are discussed. Subsequently, a theoretical analysis of the definition of clinical practice guidelines is proposed in order to show their feasibility to assess (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Retributive Argument Against Punishment.Greg Roebuck & David Wood - 2011 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 5 (1):73-86.
    This paper proposes a retributive argument against punishment, where punishment is understood as going beyond condemnation or censure, and requiring hard treatment. The argument sets out to show that punishment cannot be justified. The argument does not target any particular attempts to justify punishment, retributive or otherwise. Clearly, however, if it succeeds, all such attempts fail. No argument for punishment is immune from the argument against punishment proposed here. The argument does not purport to be an argument only against retributive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • A Compatibilist Theory of Legal Responsibility.Nicole A. Vincent - 2015 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 9 (3):477-498.
    Philosophical compatibilism reconciles moral responsibility with determinism, and some neurolaw scholars think that it can also reconcile legal views about responsibility with scientific findings about the neurophysiological basis of human action. Although I too am a compatibilist, this paper argues that philosophical compatibilism cannot be transplanted “as-is” from philosophy into law. Rather, before compatibilism can be re-deployed, it must first be modified to take account of differences between legal and moral responsibility, and between a scientific and a deterministic world view, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Ethical Implications of Considering Neurolaw as a New Power.Daniel Pallarés-Dominguez & Elsa González Esteban - 2016 - Ethics and Behavior 26 (3):252-266.
    Caution is one of the orienting principles of neuroscience’s advance in different social spheres. This article shows the importance of maintaining caution in the area of neurolaw because of its risk of becoming a new power that is free from ethical discussion. The article’s objective is to note the principal ethical implications and limitations of neurolaw in light of six cases in which neuroscientific evidence was used in distinct ways. This study seeks to examine the precautions that should be taken (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Punishment.Zachary Hoskins - 2016 - Analysis:anw022.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Legal Responsibility Adjudication and the Normative Authority of the Mind Sciences.Nicole A. Vincent - 2011 - Philosophical Explorations 14 (3):315-331.
    In the field of ?neurolaw?, reformists claim that recent scientific discoveries from the mind sciences have serious ramifications for how legal responsibility should be adjudicated, but conservatives deny that this is so. In contrast, I criticise both of these polar opposite positions by arguing that although scientific findings can have often-weighty normative significance, they lack the normative authority with which reformists often imbue them. After explaining why conservatives and reformists are both wrong, I then offer my own moderate suggestions about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Neuroscience, Ethics and Legal Responsibility: The Problem of the Insanity Defense.Steven R. Smith - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (3):475-481.
    The insanity defense presents many difficult questions for the legal system. It attracts attention beyond its practical significance (it is seldom used successfully) because it goes to the heart of the concept of legal responsibility. “Not guilty by reason of insanity” generally requires that as a result of mental illness the defendant was unable to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the crime. The many difficult and complex questions presented by the insanity defense have led some in the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations