Beyond the epistemological wall. Methodological notes to deal with neurosciences’ discoveries

Journal title SOCIOLOGIA DEL DIRITTO
Author/s Ivan Daldoss
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/1 Language English
Pages 18 P. 53-70 File size 259 KB
DOI 10.3280/SD2022-001003
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page .

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This paper addresses some of the growing interactions among different fields of scientific knowledge, especially focusing on the complex links between neuroscience and law under the lens of criminal responsibility. It ponders on some crucial issues: how to deal with the chance to blend in disparate forms of knowledge? In light of which methods and arguments a choice among divergent disciplinary contributions is legitimate? This work suggests a dialectical approach to rationally frame these epistemological connections, to foster the critical meeting of diverse perspectives, and thus favour the emergence of valuable common spaces: the Socratic method. Thereby, a functional balance among different scientific dimensions is possibly reachable, overcoming the "epistemological wall" between social and natural sciences. Thus, even in the legal sphere, one should not a priori discard neurosciences’ relevance and results, albeit this might require a hint of "neuromodesty" and critical thinking.

Keywords: Interdisciplinary knowledge - Epistemological bridges - Socratic method - Neurolaw

  1. Berti, Enrico, 1987. Contraddizione e dialettica: negli antichi e nei moderni. Palermo: L’Epos società editrice.
  2. Cavalla, Francesco, 1983. Della possibilità di fondare la logica giudiziaria sulla struttura del principio di non contraddizione. Saggio introduttivo. Verifiche, 1, 1: 5-38.
  3. Cavalla, Francesco, 2008. Retorica processo verità. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  4. Cloatre, Emilie, 2016. Sociological Reflections on the Neurosciences. Medical Law International, 16, 3-4: 252-258. DOI: 10.1177/096853321667344
  5. Cloatre, Emilie, & Martyn Pickersgill (eds.), 2015. Knowledge, Technology, and Law. Abingdon-New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/978020379760
  6. Daldoss, Ivan, 2021. Bring It On! Debate into University. A Methodological Proposal to Foster Creative and Critical Thinking. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of the Journal Scuola Democratica “Reinventing Education”, 3: 359-370.
  7. Dordoni, Paolo, & Ivo Lizzola, 2009. Il dialogo socratico. Una sfida per un pluralismo sostenibile. Milano: Apogeo.
  8. Dworkin, Ronald, 1974. Hard Cases. Harvard Law Review, 88, 6: 1057-1109. DOI: 10.2307/134024
  9. Ferrari, Franco (a cura di), 2013. Teeteto. Milano: Rizzoli.
  10. Foucault, Michel, 1985. Discourse and Truth: The Problematization of Parrhesia. Evanston: Northwest University Press.
  11. Foucault, Michel, 2019. Discourse and Truth and Parrēsia. Chicago-London: The University of Chicago Press.
  12. Goodenough, Oliver R., & Micaela Tucker, 2010. Law and Cognitive Neuroscience. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 6: 61-92.
  13. Goodenough, Oliver R., & Micaela Tucker, 2011. Neuroscience Basics for Lawyers. Mercer Law Review, 62, 3: 945-958.
  14. Greely, Henry T., 2009. Law and the Revolution in Neuroscience: An Early Look at the Field. Akron Law Review, 42, 3: 687-716.
  15. Greely, Henry T., & Nita A. Farahany, 2019. Neuroscience and the Criminal Justice System. Annual Review of Criminology, 2: 21.1-21.21.
  16. Greene, Joshua, & Jonathan Cohen, 2004. For the Law, Neuroscience Changes Nothing and Everything. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 359, 1451: 1775-1785.
  17. Ibáñez, Agustín, Lucas Sedeño, & Adolfo M. García (eds.), 2017a. Neuroscience and Social Science: The Missing Link. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-68421-
  18. Ibáñez, Agustín, Lucas Sedeño, & Adolfo M. García (eds.), 2017b. Exploring the Borderlands of Neuroscience and Social Science. In Agustín Ibáñez, Lucas Sedeño & Adolfo M. García (eds.), Neuroscience and Social Science: The Missing Link. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-68421-5_
  19. Jones, Owen D., René Marois, Martha J. Farah, & Henry T. Greely, 2013. Law and Neuroscience. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 45: 17624-17630. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3254-13.201
  20. Luhmann, Niklas, [1974]1978. Rechtssystem und Rechtsdogmatik. Traduzione italiana Sistema giuridico e dogmatica giuridica. Traduzione e introduzione di Alberto Febbrajo. Bologna: il Mulino.
  21. Luhmann, Niklas [1984]1995. Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. English translation Social Systems. Translation by John Bednarz jr. with Dirk Baecker. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  22. Luhmann, Niklas, 1986. The Autopoiesis of Social Systems. In Felix R. Geyer & Johannes van der Zouwen (eds.), Sociocybernetic Paradoxes: Observation, Control and Evolution of Self-steering Systems. London: Sage Publications.
  23. Montanari, Franco, [1995]2003. Vocabolario della lingua greca. Torino: Loescher Editore.
  24. Morse, Stephen J., 2006. Brain Overclaim Syndrome and Criminal Responsibility: A Diagnostic Note. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 3, 2: 397-412.
  25. Morse, Stephen J., 2007. Criminal Responsibility and the Disappearing Person. Cardozo Law Review, 28, 6: 2545-2576.
  26. Morse, Stephen J., 2014. The Status of Neurolaw: A Plea for Current Modesty and Future, Cautious Optimism. Court Review, 50, 2: 94-103.
  27. Morse, Stephen J., 2021. Internal and External Challenges to Culpability. Arizona State Law Journal, 53, 2: 617-654.
  28. Nelson, Leonard, 1949. Socratic Method and Critical Philosophy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  29. Pickersgill, Martyn, & Ira Van Keulen (eds.), 2011. Sociological Reflections on the Neurosciences. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald.
  30. Ross, Alf, [1953]2019. Om ret og retfærdighed. English translation On Law and Justice. Edited and with an introduction by Jakob v. H. Holtermann and translated by Uta Bindreiter. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  31. Roussos, Andrés, Malena Braun, Saskia Aufenacker, & Julieta Olivera, 2017. Psychotherapy and Social Neuroscience: Forging Links Together. In Agustín Ibáñez, Lucas Sedeño & Adolfo M. García (eds.), Neuroscience and Social Science: The Missing Link. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-68421-5_1
  32. Salles, Arleen, & Kathinka Evers, 2017. Social Neuroscience and Neuroethics: A Fruitful Synergy. In Agustín Ibáñez, Lucas Sedeño & Adolfo M. García (eds.), Neuroscience and Social Science: The Missing Link. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-68421-5_2
  33. Sommaggio, Paolo, 2012. Contraddittorio Giudizio Mediazione. La danza del demone mediano. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  34. Sommaggio, Paolo, 2016. Philosophy, Law & Society: Seven Simple Samples. Padova: Libreria universitaria.it edizioni.
  35. Sommaggio, Paolo, 2020. Nuove strategie per la formazione di un giurista socratico. In Paolo Moro (a cura di), Insegnare diritto ed economia: metodi e prospettive della didattica giuridica ed economica. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  36. Sommaggio, Paolo, & Ivan Daldoss, 2020. The Graphic Representation of Education. Architectures and Models. Teoria e Critica della Regolazione Sociale / Theory and Criticism of Social Regulation, 1, 20: 179-198. DOI: 10.7413/1970547602
  37. Sommaggio, Paolo, & Ivan Daldoss, & Chiara Tamanini, 2019. The Project ‘A suon di parole - Il gioco del contraddittorio’. An Educational Game to Disseminate the Culture of Contradictory Opposition in Italian High School Debates. Scuola democratica, 10, 4: 175-188. DOI: 10.12828/9636
  38. Sommaggio, Paolo, & Ivan Daldoss, & Chiara Tamanini (a cura di), 2020. A suon di parole: il gioco del contraddittorio. Il format trentino del dibattito per l’innovazione della didattica. Milano: Mimesis.
  39. Von Scheve, Christian, 2011. Sociology of Neuroscience or Neurosociology? In Martyn Pickersgill & Ira Van Keulen (eds.), Sociological Reflections on the Neurosciences. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald. DOI: 10.1108/S1057-6290(2011)000001301

Ivan Daldoss, Beyond the epistemological wall. Methodological notes to deal with neurosciences’ discoveries in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL DIRITTO " 1/2022, pp 53-70, DOI: 10.3280/SD2022-001003