The Brain and The Law

Neuroscientist Dr David Eagleman considers some emerging questions relating to law and neuroscience, challenging long-held assumptions in criminality and punishment and predicting a radical new future for the legal system.

(Apr 21, 2009 at the RSA)

Is it a legitimate defence, for example, to claim that a brain tumour or unique neural wiring made you do it? Will neuroscience inform sentencing decisions by offering a better prediction of recidivism? Can novel technologies such as brain imaging be leveraged for new methods of rehabilitation? If most behaviours are driven by systems of the brain that we cannot control, how should the law assess responsibility?

Chair: Dr Matt Grist, head of the RSA's Social Brain project.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• uchannel
• academic
• lectures
• rsa
• science
• law
• crime

[ulived1969]

I AM JESUS,

I AM THE 666 IN REVELATION,

I AM THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH....

[turak0]

@PTurchan1 Thick headed obtuse idiots like you are stupid forever. go peck at your own shit and don't bother me

[PTurchan1]

@turak0

You could be relevant and/or send a message.

[turak0]

Einstein claimed that the weakest force in the Universe can bend light. This has been used to explain the existence of 'black holes' That is pure BULLSHIT. All astronomy and cosmology uses this hoax to explain the universe: which is more BULLSHIT. There are no black holes in the Universe: another example of pure BULLSHIT. There is no dark matter in the Universe: another example of pure BULLSHIT: you expect me to give you all the data on this forum? You're a fucking IDIOT ..

[PTurchan1]

@turak0

So "science is not logical" yet "refuses to recognize and practice ts [sic] own logic". That make no sense. You also have no evidence --again-- for what you are saying.

[turak0]

@PTurchan1 You are missing the point again. Most of Science is a SCAM. Most of Science is a HOAX. Most of Science is not logical, Science refuses to recognize and practice ts own logic, Science refuses to connect facts together. Science selectively and consistently ignores the most pertinent facts. There are lies, and there are damn lies, and there is scientific bullshit. Develop your critical thinking skills and don't bother me again. Goodbye.

[PTurchan1]

@turak0

No, your issue is that you haven't an idea of what Eagleman said or what science can do. Science does not claim certainty. Neuroscience recognizes that brains are different but certain structures seem to be consistently responsible for specific behaviors (see, for instance, the nucleus acumbens).

[turak0]

@PTurchan1 I am not misrepresenting anything: you're looking for a bone to pick. I'm telling you the entire carcass is rotten and you refuse to understand simple logic. Go waste somebody else's time with your trivia-oriented chicken brain. Pecking at grains of sand is why you can't see the whole picture. That's your problem: not mine: goodbye

[PTurchan1]

@turak0

Can you give me the specific time stamp where Eagleman said that the "human brain is an island" or that it can be "studied as an isolated phenomenon"?

[turak0]

@PTurchan1you are are deaf to logic The point I successfully made is the FACT that when your methodology is faulty: it doesn't matter what he said, When you EXCLUDE relevant facts from your study then your entire work is a waste of time. That is why he and o\you are stupid. Selective intelligence is the stupidest bunch of scientific bullshit ever invented. Einstein proved that 100 years ago. It's called the Theory of General Relativity. Read it and wake up.