There is a great article today in the NYT about the impact neuroscience is having on the field of law. Here's a little snippit:
Carter Snead, a law professor at Notre Dame, drafted a staff working paper on the impact of neuroscientific evidence in criminal law for President Bush's Council on Bioethics. The report concludes that neuroimaging evidence is of mixed reliability but "the large number of cases in which such evidence is presented is striking." That number will no doubt increase substantially. Proponents of neurolaw say that neuroscientific evidence will have a large impact not only on questions of guilt and punishment but also on the detection of lies and hidden bias, and on the prediction of future criminal behavior. At the same time, skeptics fear that the use of brain-scanning technology as a kind of super mind-reading device will threaten our privacy and mental freedom, leading some to call for the legal system to respond with a new concept of "cognitive liberty."
A robo-salamander "is being used by a Franco-Swiss team to investigate how the first land animals on Earth might have walked."
After watching Jesus Camp last night I'm happy to give you a whole bunch of Atheist logos
Comments
I knew you guys were going to be onto that NYT article. I've already sent the link to my co-bloggers for our next (?number 14? 15?) podcast. I may do a post instead depending on our taping schedule; we've got a weekend off due to vacations. I'm totally convinced the NYT is reading our blogs. (It's not a delusion if it's true.)
Posted by: ClinkShrink | March 11, 2007 12:42 PM
well we know at least one person who write for the NYT is reading blogs - i.e. Tierney Lab blog.
Posted by: steve | March 11, 2007 3:33 PM
ok... I really can speak english... just clearly not consistently.
Posted by: steve | March 11, 2007 3:35 PM