As neuroscientific technologies continue
to develop and inform our understanding of the mind, the opportunities for
applying neuroscience in legal proceedings have also increased. Cognitive
neuroscientists have deepened our understanding of the complex relationship
between the mind and the brain by using new techniques such as functional
magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG). The
inferences drawn from these findings and increasingly sophisticated technologies
are being applied to debates and processes in the legal field, from lie
detection in criminal trials to critical legal doctrines surrounding the
insanity defense or guilt adjudication. In Minds, Brains, and Law: The
Conceptual Foundations of Law and Neuroscience, Michael S. Pardo and Dennis
Patterson assess the philosophical questions that arise when neuroscientific
research and technology are applied in the legal system. They examine the
arguments favoring the increased use of neuroscience in law, the means for
assessing its reliability in legal proceedings, and the integration of
neuroscientific research into substantive legal doctrines. The authors use their
explorations to inform a corrective inquiry into the mistaken inferences and
conceptual errors that arise from mismatched concepts, such as the mental
disconnect of what constitutes "lying" on a lie detection test. The empirical,
practical, ethical, and conceptual issues that Pardo and Patterson seek to
redress will deeply influence how we negotiate and implement the fruits of
neuroscience in law and policy in the future.
