ORCID Profile
0000-0002-8772-2318
Current Organisations
Charles Sturt University
,
Macquarie University
,
University of Technology Sydney
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 04-2012
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 09-2011
Publisher: Oxford University PressNew York
Date: 05-02-2013
DOI: 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199925605.003.0001
Abstract: This volume investigates the question of whether, and if so how, advances in the mind sciences – chiefly in neuroscience, psychology and behavioural genetics – impact on the moral foundations of legal responsibility practices. This introductory chapter does three things. First, it sets aside the radical claim that findings from the mind sciences challenge responsibility by revealing that something like determinism is true. Second, motivated by historical reflection, it adopts a modest and broadly compatibilist stance, arguing that advances in the mind sciences may impact on legal responsibility practices by providing further insights into the nature of human agency, and by offering rev ed diagnostic criteria and more powerful diagnostic and intervention tools with which to appraise and to alter minds. Third, it provides an overview of the other thirteen chapters which have been arranged under five headings: responsibility and mental capacity reappraising agency responsibility assessment disease and disorder and modification of minds.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 26-11-2009
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Date: 29-09-2015
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 04-09-2008
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 18-08-2013
Publisher: Oxford University PressNew York
Date: 05-02-2013
DOI: 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199925605.001.0001
Abstract: How should neuroscience, psychology and behavioural genetics impact on legal responsibility practices? Recent findings from these fields are sometimes claimed to threaten the moral foundations of legal responsibility practices by revealing that determinism, or something like it, is true. On this account legal responsibility practices should be abolished because there is no room for such outmoded fictions as responsibility in an enlightened and scientifically-informed approach to the regulation of society. However, the chapters in this volume reject this claim and its related agenda of radical legal reform. Embracing instead a broadly compatibilist approach – one according to which responsibility hinges on psychological features of agents not on metaphysical features of the universe – this volume’s authors demonstrate that the behavioural and mind sciences may impact on legal responsibility practices in a range of different ways. For instance, by providing fresh insight into the nature of normal and pathological human agency, by offering updated medical and legal criteria for forensic practitioners as well as powerful new diagnostic and intervention tools and techniques with which to appraise and to alter minds, and by raising novel regulatory challenges. Science and law have been locked in a dialogue on the nature of human agency ever since the 13th century when a mental element was added to the criteria for legal responsibility. The rich story told by the authors in this volume testifies that far from ending this dialogue, neuroscience, psychology and behavioural genetics have the potential to further enrich and extend this dialogue.
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Date: 2011
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Date: 2011
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 10-12-2013
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 25-05-2012
Publisher: Oxford University PressNew York
Date: 05-02-2013
DOI: 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199925605.003.0013
Abstract: We normally think that responsibility tracks mental capacity — i.e. that people’s responsibility diminishes when their mental capacities are compromised, and that it is restored as those capacities are regained. But how is responsibility affected when mental capacities are extended beyond their normal range? Would cognitively enhanced people become “hyper responsible”, and if so then in what sense? Might they acquire new responsibilities? Could they be blamed for failing to discharge those responsibilities? Would this make them more prone to being liable? Would they necessarily be less irresponsible than their non-enhanced counterparts? Relatedly, might we sometimes have a responsibility to cognitively enhance ourselves, and might we be negligent or maybe even reckless if we don’t do so? This chapter argues that cognitive enhancement affects our responsibility in a range of different ways, and it also suggests some ways in which cognitive enhancement is likely to impact on legal responsibility.
Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
Date: 17-07-2014
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 07-2016
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 02-2019
DOI: 10.1016/J.NEURON.2019.01.004
Abstract: Neuroethics is central to the Australian Brain Initiative's aim to sustain a thriving and responsible neurotechnology industry. Diverse and inclusive community and stakeholder engagement and a trans-disciplinary approach to neuroethics will be key to the success of the Australian Brain Initiative.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 16-06-2010
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 04-2016
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 17-02-2011
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 21-01-2009
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 06-2013
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Date: 18-09-2015
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 26-03-2020
DOI: 10.1093/OSO/9780190651145.003.0001
Abstract: The development of modern diagnostic neuroimaging techniques led to discoveries about the human brain and mind that helped give rise to the field of neurolaw. This new interdisciplinary field has led analytic jurisprudence and philosophy of law in novel directions by providing an empirically informed platform from which scholars have reassessed topics such as mental privacy and self-determination, responsibility and its relationship to mental disorders, and the proper aims of criminal law. Similarly, the development of neurointervention techniques that promise to deliver new ways of altering people’s minds (by intervening in their brains) creates opportunities and challenges that raise important and rich conceptual, moral, jurisprudential, and scientific questions, and help us to tease apart analytic jurisprudence from synthetic jurisprudence . This volume advances the field of neurolaw by investigating issues raised by the development and use of neurointerventions (actual, proposed, and potential) to regulate human mental capacity, and those raised by the law’s regulation of the use of neurointerventions.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 08-11-2017
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 06-06-2012
No related grants have been discovered for Nicole Vincent.