Neurolaw and Neuroethics

This short article proposes a conceptual structure for “neurolaw,” modeled loosely on the bipartite division of the sister field of neuroethics by Adina Roskies into the “ethics of neuroscience” and the “neuroscience of ethics.” As normative fields addressing the implications of scientific discoveri...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Chandler, Jennifer A. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press 2018
In: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Year: 2018, Volume: 27, Issue: 4, Pages: 590-598
Further subjects:B law and neuroscience
B Responsibility
B Neuroethics
B neurolaw
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1827972955
003 DE-627
005 20221220052641.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221220s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1017/S0963180118000117  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1827972955 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1827972955 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Chandler, Jennifer A.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Neurolaw and Neuroethics 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This short article proposes a conceptual structure for “neurolaw,” modeled loosely on the bipartite division of the sister field of neuroethics by Adina Roskies into the “ethics of neuroscience” and the “neuroscience of ethics.” As normative fields addressing the implications of scientific discoveries and expanding technological capacities affecting the brain, “neurolaw” and neuroethics have followed parallel paths. Similar foundational questions arise for both about the validity and utility of recognizing them as distinct subfields of law and ethics, respectively. In both, a useful distinction can be drawn between a self-reflexive inquiry (the neuroscience of ethics and law) and an inquiry into the development and use of brain science and technologies (the ethics and law of neuroscience). In both fields, these two forms of inquiry interact in interesting ways. In addition to a proposed conceptual structure for neurolaw, the article also addresses the neurolegal versions of the critiques made against neuroethics, including charges of reductionism, fact/value confusion, and biological essentialism. 
601 |a Neuroethik 
650 4 |a Responsibility 
650 4 |a Neuroethics 
650 4 |a law and neuroscience 
650 4 |a neurolaw 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics  |d Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992  |g 27(2018), 4, Seite 590-598  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)306655039  |w (DE-600)1499985-7  |w (DE-576)081985010  |x 1469-2147  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:27  |g year:2018  |g number:4  |g pages:590-598 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180118000117  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-quarterly-of-healthcare-ethics/article/neurolaw-and-neuroethics/16E694B672AA41558F2A8DB616222D9F  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4235377868 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1827972955 
LOK |0 005 20221220052641 
LOK |0 008 221220||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-12-06#64954401F06294893D6253CC396C2DFE7541A378 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw