Speed dating as a methodological innovation
I will consider in particular the preeminent method of functional neuroimaging: BOLD f MRI.
While there are several practical limits on the biological information that current technologies can measure, these limits—as important as they are—are minor in comparison to the fundamental logical restraints on the conclusions that can be drawn from brain imaging studies.
In demonstrating the utility of law and emotions scholarship, we also respond to some of the explicit concerns that have been raised about purposive legal intervention in the emotions.Traumatic brain injury (TBI), along with its acute and chronic sequelae, has emerged as a focus of neuroethical issues, such as informed consent for treatment and research, diagnostic and prognostic uncertainties, and the subjectivity of interpretation of data.The law has also more frequently considered TBI in criminal settings for exculpation, mitigation and sentencing purposes and in tort and administrative law for personal injury, disability and worker's compensation cases.This reception contrasts sharply with that accorded to two fields that have also challenged dominant notions of (legal) rationality: behavioral law and economics, and the emerging field of law and neuroscience.
In this Article, we examine the ambivalent reception of this promising body of work.
This article surveys the neuroethics and neurolegal literature on the use of forensic neuroimaging within the courtroom.