Useful either as aggravation or as mitigation. So i have been doing an empirical study over the past six years now to look at, introduction in criminal cases. Its equivocal at best. It sometimes ends up being aggravating, but so far it hasnt panned out. Why hasnt it panned out . In part because science isnt quite there yet in that were able to see some things at a group level, but being able to talk bay single individual to look at their brain and to understand the extent to which their brain differences contribute to their behavior is very challenging. There just isnt enough data for that yet. You can say things at a groupwide level, though. And so kent mentioned earlier the case out of florida in the sue presume court graham in which the court said the juvenile should be treated differently with respect to life without the possibility of parole. The same happened in simmons where the court has treated juveniles differently. It may be the case we can start to do that. We can start to
Particular case whether a person is an automoton, usually you can. The law has a bright line. It says if you engage in a wongful action, there is a defense called the insanity defense which never works as most of us know because we dont recognize it. Should we recognize it, thats an interesting question. Should we have a more robust concept of diminished responsibility in light of the understanding that some people have less control over their preferences and desires or should we have better sentencing schemes or get rid of incarceration and come up with different models of trying to deal with punishment once we understand people have wrong selections. I think those are all interesting questions, but is there free will . Well, the fact that almost everybody in the audience raised either their right or left hand contemplated it and were quickly able to act and respond. That to me says, yes, there is. Now what do we want to do about it . Now that we understand that those of us in the aud
File out of virginia, that the vast majority of people who have a tumor like that who may have preferences and desires to act on sexual impulses dont. Though we may not know in any particular case whether a person is an automoton, usually you can. The law has a bright line. It says if you engage in a wongful action, there is a defense called the insanity defense which never works as most of us know because we dont recognize it. Should we recognize it, thats an interesting question. Should we have a more robust concept of diminished responsibility in light of the understanding that some people have less control over their preferences and desires or should we have better sentencing schemes or get rid of incarceration and come up with different models of trying to deal with punishment once we understand people have wrong selections. I think those are all interesting questions, but is there free will . Well, the fact that almost everybody in the audience raised either their right or left h
Theoretically whether we can distinguish preferences from action, but whether we can identify those either before the fact or after the fact that had that inability to control their actions. Yeah, but what we do know is that even like the one that kent presented, the pedestriano file out of virginia, that the vast majority of people who have a tumor like that who may have preferences and desires to act on sexual impulses dont. Though we may not know in any particular case whether a person is an automoton, usually you can. The law has a bright line. It says if you engage in a wongful action, there is a defense called the insanity defense which never works as most of us know because we dont recognize it. Should we recognize it, thats an interesting question. Should we have a more robust concept of diminished responsibility in light of the understanding that some people have less control over their preferences and desires or should we have better sentencing schemes or get rid of incarcera
Actions, not for bad preferences and desires. So then the question is, how do we take account for preferences and desires that may be outside of your control . That may be things like gray matter lighten kent showed us that showed us that people like psychopaths have decreased gray matter in particular regions of their brain. It could be Something Like the guy who he was talking about out of virginia who had the large tumor in his brain and chose to act on but didnt have control over having the tumor in his brain. How do we take account for that in law . Thats, i think, the interesting struggle that neuroscience presents us with, but it doesnt change the issue of free will. In fact, we have just as robust of evidence from neuroscience that supports this concept of action which is what we punish for in law to begin with. And, doctor, would you like to comment on that last . No. [laughter] i would like to raise an issue. Theoretically, that may all be true. There is a problem in distingu