Sinha Chetan
OP Jindal Global University, Sonipat, India.
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2024 Dec 21;59(1):4. doi: 10.1007/s12124-024-09882-4.
What does the brain mean in a legal domain, and how does integrating neuroscience and law go beyond the practical difficulties highlighted by social scientists and legal theorists? The debate about the confluence of neuroscience and law is both promising and uncertain. Legal theorists took it as a conceptual error, and neuroscience advocates find it a promising emerging field. The social psychological approach towards law is for critical integration of both. Scholars took an alternative route, considering it a fascinating element of scientific discourse. The present article aims to show that the coming of "brain language" in the everyday legal discourse will not become a reality, as truth is inferred through everyday experiences and the interpretations of scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge through mapping active brain areas by the available brain visualizing techniques shows the correlation between the brain and behavior, not the causation. So, its use in the legal domain seems less institutionalized, showing the determinism of the brain as less authentic in itself when compared with the intuitive path embedded in culture and history. Implication for sociolegal psychology working for dignity and social justice is discussed.
在法律领域中，大脑意味着什么？将神经科学与法律相结合又如何超越社会科学家和法律理论家所强调的实际困难呢？关于神经科学与法律融合的争论既充满希望又存在不确定性。法律理论家将其视为一种概念错误，而神经科学倡导者则认为它是一个充满希望的新兴领域。社会心理学对法律的研究方法旨在对两者进行批判性整合。学者们另辟蹊径，将其视为科学话语中一个引人入胜的元素。本文旨在表明，“大脑语言”在日常法律话语中的出现不会成为现实，因为真理是通过日常经验和对科学知识的解释推断出来的。通过现有的大脑可视化技术绘制活跃的脑区所获得的科学知识显示了大脑与行为之间的相关性，而非因果关系。因此，它在法律领域的应用似乎不太规范，与文化和历史中所蕴含的直观路径相比，大脑决定论本身的真实性较低。文中还讨论了社会法律心理学对尊严和社会正义的影响。
