Is it possible to pass judgment on a brain scan? Someone will say that this has been happening for a long time. However, not everything is so simple and most likely the law will not turn into one of the branches of neuroscience. In this episode we are talking about the philosophy of law and the limits of the influence of neuroscience.
Guest: philosopher Anton Didikin
Moderator: Anton Kuznetsov
00:00 - Introduction
01:55 - Why is the use of neuroscience in law limited?
04:55 - MRI scan and evidence system
07:38 - Neuroscience is about causality, and law is about normativity
10:30 - The gap between mental acts and brain states
12:46 - Free will or restructuring of the legal system?
19:08 - Neuroscience is one thing, neuromania is another
27:02 - Ethics is not law“ "injections” of everyday language into law
29:53 - There is no data accuracy, and criminal intent cannot be seen on a brain scan
33:04 - Law often does not work with empirical facts
33:51 - Judges, Cognitive distortions and Sapolski
38:51 - What is the future of neurotechnologies in law?
40:52 - How lawyers and philosophers of law understand consciousness and freedom of will
44:25 - For future releases
45:47 - Summary from Mary
Listen to the podcast on the platforms:
Soundcloud | Podcasts Apple | Yandex Music | Castbox | ...