Linked e-resources
Details
Table of Contents
Preface; Acknowledgements; Contents; Summary; 1 Free Will and Determinism; Abstract; 1.1 Folk Beliefs About Free Will; 1.2 Theological Objections to Free Will; 1.3 Philosophical Considerations of Free Will and Determinism; 1.3.1 Compatibilism; 1.3.2 Libertarianism; 1.3.3 Hard Determinism; References; 2 Existing Legislation on Mental Disorders and Criminal Cases; Abstract; 2.1 Insanity; 2.1.1 The M'Naghten Case; 2.1.2 Interpretation of the M'Naghten Rules; 2.2 Diminished Responsibility; 2.3 Automatism; 2.4 Reform of the Law; 2.4.1 2013 Law Commission Discussion Paper; References
3 Biological Basis of BehaviourAbstract; 3.1 Neuroarchitecture and Brain Imaging; 3.1.1 Brain Imaging Techniques; 3.1.2 Functional Architecture of the Brain; 3.2 Genetics of Behaviour; 3.2.1 Epigenetics; 3.2.2 Non-coding RNAs (NcRNAs); 3.2.3 Genes Do Influence Behaviour; 3.3 Neurophysiology of Self-initiated Action and the Implications for the Understanding of Free Will; 3.3.1 Studies Involving Electroencephalography; 3.3.2 Studies Involving Brain Imaging; 3.3.3 Investigations at the Neuronal Level; 3.3.4 Philosophical and Moral Implications of These Experiments
3.4 Brain Injury: Examples of Altered Behaviour Arising from Changes in Brain Structure3.4.1 Trauma; 3.4.2 Tumour; 3.4.3 Atrophy; References; 4 Use of Genetic and Neuroscientific Evidence in Criminal Cases: A Brief History of "Neurolaw"; Abstract; 4.1 The Emergence of Neurolaw in the USA and Beyond; 4.2 The Place of Scientific Evidence in Criminal Trials; 4.3 Genetics Factors; 4.3.1 Molecular Genetics in Criminal Cases; 4.4 Use of Brain Imaging in Criminal Cases; 4.4.1 Brain Imaging as a Tool for Lie Detection and Knowledge of Case-Related Information
4.4.2 Brain Physiology and the Culpability of MinorsReferences; 5 Are We Ready for an Expanded Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in the Courtroom?; Abstract; 5.1 Is the Genetic and Brain Imaging Evidence on Behaviour Scientifically Robust and, if so, Does the Science Support a Deterministic Worldview?; 5.1.1 Neuroscience; 5.1.2 Genetics; 5.2 Should the Science Be Used in Court and, if so, in What Ways?; 5.2.1 The Legal Applicability of Biological Evidence; 5.2.2 Achieving a Just Outcome in Trials Employing Neurobiological Evidence; 5.3 Conclusion; References
3 Biological Basis of BehaviourAbstract; 3.1 Neuroarchitecture and Brain Imaging; 3.1.1 Brain Imaging Techniques; 3.1.2 Functional Architecture of the Brain; 3.2 Genetics of Behaviour; 3.2.1 Epigenetics; 3.2.2 Non-coding RNAs (NcRNAs); 3.2.3 Genes Do Influence Behaviour; 3.3 Neurophysiology of Self-initiated Action and the Implications for the Understanding of Free Will; 3.3.1 Studies Involving Electroencephalography; 3.3.2 Studies Involving Brain Imaging; 3.3.3 Investigations at the Neuronal Level; 3.3.4 Philosophical and Moral Implications of These Experiments
3.4 Brain Injury: Examples of Altered Behaviour Arising from Changes in Brain Structure3.4.1 Trauma; 3.4.2 Tumour; 3.4.3 Atrophy; References; 4 Use of Genetic and Neuroscientific Evidence in Criminal Cases: A Brief History of "Neurolaw"; Abstract; 4.1 The Emergence of Neurolaw in the USA and Beyond; 4.2 The Place of Scientific Evidence in Criminal Trials; 4.3 Genetics Factors; 4.3.1 Molecular Genetics in Criminal Cases; 4.4 Use of Brain Imaging in Criminal Cases; 4.4.1 Brain Imaging as a Tool for Lie Detection and Knowledge of Case-Related Information
4.4.2 Brain Physiology and the Culpability of MinorsReferences; 5 Are We Ready for an Expanded Use of Neuroscientific Evidence in the Courtroom?; Abstract; 5.1 Is the Genetic and Brain Imaging Evidence on Behaviour Scientifically Robust and, if so, Does the Science Support a Deterministic Worldview?; 5.1.1 Neuroscience; 5.1.2 Genetics; 5.2 Should the Science Be Used in Court and, if so, in What Ways?; 5.2.1 The Legal Applicability of Biological Evidence; 5.2.2 Achieving a Just Outcome in Trials Employing Neurobiological Evidence; 5.3 Conclusion; References