Law and Neurosciences
Volledige vakbeschrijving
This course introduces students to the relatively new interdisciplinary field of law,
neuroscience and philosophy (in short: neurolaw). By using an integrative approach students are invited to study some potential applications, but also limitations of neuroscience in the field of law, more in particular criminal law. On a more philosophical level the course also explores how neuroscientific research may challenge the foundations and conditions of criminal liability. The main themes of the course include the following: the neuroscientific challenge to free will and responsibility; the scientific and legal view on human agency and personhood; the problem of neuroreductionism (reducing mental states and behaviour to brain states); diagnosing and assessing mental capacities (in light of the insanity defence); addiction; neuroscience and violence, coercive brain-reading and human rights, and finally, we will also focus on some criminological aspects and the rehabilitative use of neuroscientific techniques
Doelstellingen van dit vak
Upon completion of this course, the student must be able to:
- understand the basic conditions of criminal liability and how neuroscientific research may challenge these conditions;
- understand the different philosophical positions on the free will and determinism debate;
- reflect on the neuroscientific challenges to free will, human agency and legal responsibility;
- understand the relevance of neuroscientific techniques as a diagnostic tool in order to determine mental capacities and disabilities, with a particular focus on the insanity defence;
- critically reflect on the use of science and the legal image of man;
- assess the value and limitations of neuroscientific evidence in court cases, especially regarding lie-detection;
- explore how coercive neuro-technologies (brain-reading) raise fundamental questions for human rights (right to respect for private life and the privilege against self-incrimination);
- reflect on the value of neuroscientific techniques as a predictive tool for risk assessment;
- reflect on the use of neuroscientific techniques (brain interventions) to modify the brain in order to enhance people’s responsibility
Voorwaarden
Although there are no prerequisites for this course, we expect good English language and writing skills. Also, some basic legal knowledge is necessary to understand the main topics of this course. Therefore, in the first two weeks some introductory lectures will be given on the basic concepts of criminal and private law, especially for students without any knowledge of law.
One is also required to study additionally
- chapters 2,4, and 6 from J. Hage & B. Akkermans (eds), Introduction to law, Springer, 2014 and
- chapters 1, 3 and 6 from J. Keiler & D. Roef (eds.), Comparative Concepts of Criminal Law, Cambridge, Intersentia, 2016.
This additional literature will be made available in a reader.
Students report spending an average of 12-15 hours for each session.
Aanbevolen literatuur
The literature for this course consists of state-of-the-art articles on neurolaw. It is indicated for each session which reading materials should be studied beforehand.
Examples of relevant literature:
- U. Maoz & G. Yaffe, ‘What does recent neuroscience tell us about criminal responsibility?’ Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 2015, 120-139;
-M.S. Pardo & D. Patterson, Minds, Brains , and Law. The Conceptual Foundations of Law and Neuroscience, Oxford University Press, 2015, p.1-42; 79-140.
-S. Morse, ‘Determinism and the Death of Folk Psychology: Two Challenges to Responsibility From Neuroscience’, J.L.Sci & Techn., 2008, 1-20;
-C. Korponay & M. Koenigs, ‘The neurobiology of antisocial and amoral behaviour: insights from brain science and implications for law’ in A. Moratti & D.M. Patterson, Legal insanity and the brain: science, law and European courts, Oregon, Oxford and Portland, 2016, 9-37;
-A. Poldrack, J. Monahan, P.B. Imrey, V. Reyna, M.E. Raichle, D. Faigman and J. W. Buckholtz, ‘Predicting Violent Behavior: What Can Neuroscience Add?’, Trends in Cognitive Science, 2018, Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 111-123;
-F.X. Shen & O.D. Jones, ‘Brain Scans as Evidence: Truths, Proofs, Lies and Lessons’, Mercer Law Review ,2011, 861-883;
- S. Ligthart, Th. Douglas, C. Bublitz, T. Kooijmans and G. Meynen, ‘Forensic Brain-Reading and Mental Privacy in European Human Rights Law: Foundations and Challenges’, Neuroethics, 2020.