Morality of Neuroscientific Reductionism--Predicting Problem Populations?

Though the law is a slow changing entity, it can often be impacted by great shifts in scientific thought. More recently, with advances in neuroscience, philosophical explanations for free will, agency, and moral and legal... [ view full abstract ]

Though the law is a slow changing entity, it can often be impacted by great shifts in scientific thought. More recently, with advances in neuroscience, philosophical explanations for free will, agency, and moral and legal responsibility are being questioned. Current evidence from neuroimaging studies, animal testing, and genetic analyses enhance our understanding of issues ranging from drug addiction to the inheritability of sociopathic tendencies. With more concrete and widely accepted results on how to find and mark pathological human behavior, it would not be surprising if we move into a world where the neuroscience is used not only as a way of describing the world but also define it as well. The bigger question is whether it is within our ethics to restrict the influence of neuroscience on law, and if so, where do we draw the line? This philosophical investigation into the posed problem will span a discussion of reductive materialism and neuroscience as an appropriate form of understanding moral decision-making to the practical and predictive applications of neuroscientific studies in our legal system.