Nina Slanevskaya. Interdisciplinary Neuroscience



Sorry, no English version of this page

Neuroscience and law.

The influence of neuroevidence in court.


The role of moral responsibility in the criminal law (the definition of guilt and punishment).


Neuroevidence and the right to use it in court.


Brain scanning as neuroevidence for the denial of guilty will.


Neuroscience and punishment: retributive and consequentialist approaches.


The criticism of the possibility of using neuroscience for psycho-legal classification of crimes.



- Belcher, A., Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2009) “Neurolaw” in Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, Vol.1 (2010), Issue 1: 18-22.
- Glimcher, P.W. (2008) The Neurobiology of Individual Decision Making, Dualism, and Legal Accountability” in Engel, C., and Singer, W. (eds.) Better Than Conscious? Implications for Performance and Institutional Analysis, Strüngmann Forum Report 1, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
- Greene, J., Cohen, J. (2004) “For the Law, Neuroscience Changes Nothing and Everything” in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 359: 1775-1785.
- Lewin, R. (1980) “Is Your Brain Really Necessary?” in Science, Vol. 210: 1232-1234.
- Morse, S.J. (2004) “New Neuroscience, Old Problems” in B.Garland (ed.) Neuroscience and the Law: Brain, Mind, and the Scales of Justice, New York, Dana Press: 157-198.
- Sapolsky, R.M. (2004b) “The Frontal Cortex and the Criminal Justice System” in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: 359, 1787-1796).
- Wegner, D. (2002) The Illusion of Conscious Will, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press


Nina Slanevskaya. Interdisciplinary Neuroscience


| ©2009 N.M. Slanevskaya I