Justice is one of the most complex issues in the study of Law. Philosophical, sociological, and religious studies have attempted to articulate this value, central to human coexistence, throughout history. More recently, specialised sub-disciplines, such as Legal Psychology, have significantly contributed to refining the relationship between Law and Justice by enriching the study of these normative domains with empirical knowledge about social interactions.
In more recent developments, the discipline of Neurolaw has begun to offer new insights into the analysis of the longstanding and disputed issues surrounding Law and Justice. Neurolaw can be defined as the analysis of Law and Justice from the perspective of Neuroscience— and involves an understanding of human behavior through the study of the brain’s interactions with the environment.
Neuroscience appears to provide a more up-to-date understanding of human behavior, focussing on the legal and forensic implications. Yet, neuroscientific studies of crime fail to grasp the impact of broader socio-contextual contingencies on human conduct, including institutional failures, gender dynamics, and cultural power. Such a failure evidences the limits of neuroscience as a complete epistemological tool. It is too narrow to provide a complete understanding of complex human conduct like crime, as it involves a careful examination of the variegated interactions between various social and biological levels.
This Research Topic addresses the need for developing a holistic theoretical framework that considers not only the biological nature of human beings but also, the social, cultural, and political influences on human behavior. Such a holistic approach is necessary to clarify some foundational philosophical questions, including subjectivity and consciousness, as well as the role that these concepts play within the notion of criminal liability and punishment. In addition to these unresolved philosophical questions, there is also the need for a revised legal and forensic approach that grasps a more nuanced and complex understanding of human conduct.
Topics for contributions include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Neuroscience, Law, and Criminal Justice;
• Neuroscience, Law, and Social Justice
• Neuroscience, Law, and Racial Justice;
• Neuroscience and Restorative Justice;
• Neurorights;
• Neuroethics;
• Criminal responsibility;
• Decision making;
• Juvenile Criminal Law and Punishment;
• Free will;
• Ethical, legal, and social repercussions of the neurotechnologies currently available, as well as of those that are currently being developed.
We welcome submissions from authors with backgrounds in law, justice, philosophy, forensic neuropsychology, forensic / cognitive / social psychology, forensic psychiatry, criminology, sociology, addressing theoretical, methodological, or empirical issues related to these topics and other related ones. Cross-, inter-, and multidisciplinary contributions are of course welcome.
Justice is one of the most complex issues in the study of Law. Philosophical, sociological, and religious studies have attempted to articulate this value, central to human coexistence, throughout history. More recently, specialised sub-disciplines, such as Legal Psychology, have significantly contributed to refining the relationship between Law and Justice by enriching the study of these normative domains with empirical knowledge about social interactions.
In more recent developments, the discipline of Neurolaw has begun to offer new insights into the analysis of the longstanding and disputed issues surrounding Law and Justice. Neurolaw can be defined as the analysis of Law and Justice from the perspective of Neuroscience— and involves an understanding of human behavior through the study of the brain’s interactions with the environment.
Neuroscience appears to provide a more up-to-date understanding of human behavior, focussing on the legal and forensic implications. Yet, neuroscientific studies of crime fail to grasp the impact of broader socio-contextual contingencies on human conduct, including institutional failures, gender dynamics, and cultural power. Such a failure evidences the limits of neuroscience as a complete epistemological tool. It is too narrow to provide a complete understanding of complex human conduct like crime, as it involves a careful examination of the variegated interactions between various social and biological levels.
This Research Topic addresses the need for developing a holistic theoretical framework that considers not only the biological nature of human beings but also, the social, cultural, and political influences on human behavior. Such a holistic approach is necessary to clarify some foundational philosophical questions, including subjectivity and consciousness, as well as the role that these concepts play within the notion of criminal liability and punishment. In addition to these unresolved philosophical questions, there is also the need for a revised legal and forensic approach that grasps a more nuanced and complex understanding of human conduct.
Topics for contributions include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Neuroscience, Law, and Criminal Justice;
• Neuroscience, Law, and Social Justice
• Neuroscience, Law, and Racial Justice;
• Neuroscience and Restorative Justice;
• Neurorights;
• Neuroethics;
• Criminal responsibility;
• Decision making;
• Juvenile Criminal Law and Punishment;
• Free will;
• Ethical, legal, and social repercussions of the neurotechnologies currently available, as well as of those that are currently being developed.
We welcome submissions from authors with backgrounds in law, justice, philosophy, forensic neuropsychology, forensic / cognitive / social psychology, forensic psychiatry, criminology, sociology, addressing theoretical, methodological, or empirical issues related to these topics and other related ones. Cross-, inter-, and multidisciplinary contributions are of course welcome.