Neuroscience and the Law: Free will, responsibility and punishment

最近，关于神经科学发现应该如何或是否应该促使我们重新考虑法律制度的理论基础或实际实践这一普遍问题，引发了大量的学术辩论，公众和法律从业者也对此感兴趣。神经科学的发展越来越多地揭示了大脑中产生行为的潜在因果机制，从而引发了这样一个问题：究竟是我们自己还是我们的大脑对我们的行为负有真正的责任。这引发了两个问题：我们的行为是否自由--这是责任的道德和法律概念的核心--以及惩罚犯罪行为的目的应该被视为报应还是改过自新的问题。然而，学术辩论主要集中在具体的哲学问题上(涉及神经科学家和哲学家)，或者具体的法律问题(涉及神经科学家和律师)。哲学可以为关于法律和神经科学的辩论带来概念上的清晰和大量相关的哲学讨论；而法律反过来又为关于自由意志、道德责任和惩罚的哲学辩论带来实践层面。因此，该项目旨在探索哲学家、律师和神经科学家之间的三方合作在多大程度上可以为这些问题提供更多的线索。

Recently there has been a huge amount of academic debate about, and public and legal practitioner interest in, the general question of how or whether neuroscientific discoveries should prompt us to reconsider the theoretical underpinnings of, or the actual practice of, the legal system. Developments in neuroscience increasingly uncover the underlying causal mechanisms in the brain that generate our behaviour, thus raising the question whether it is 'us' or instead our brains that are really responsible for what we do. This raises questions both about whether we act freely - something that is central to both the moral and legal notions of responsibility - and about whether the purpose of punishment for criminal acts should be conceived as a matter of retribution or rehabilitation.However, the academic debate has largely been focussed on specifically philosophical issues (involving neuroscientists and philosophers) or specifically legal issues (involving neuroscientists and lawyers). Philosophy can bring conceptual clarity and a significant body of relevant philosophical discussion to the debate about law and neuroscience; while the law, in turn, brings a practical dimension to philosophical debates about free will, moral responsibility and punishment. This project therefore aims to explore the extent to which three-way collaboration between philosophers, lawyers and neuroscientists can shed additional light on these questions.