'Minds, Brains and Law: A Multidisciplinary Conference on Law and Neuroscience.' Bebhinn Donnelly-Lazarov, Swansea University

Neurolaw is a burgeoning field. This Swansea University College of Law conference brought many controversies to the fore. Reductionism was a major bone of contention. What kind of reduction(s) might make sense of the relationship between mind and brain. What conceptual apparatus is needed to refute these? On this, the exchanges between Michael Moore, Dennis Patterson, Marion Godman and Pim Haselager were lively and illuminating. The debate was brought to bear on more practical considerations. How much caution should law take in welcoming neuroscientific evidence, what is the probative value of various forms of this evidence, what sense can we expect juries and judges to make of the science and what assistance do they need? Over the next couple of weeks I will attempt to show how contributions to the conference shed light on these and other questions. My interest is in the connection between neuroscience and intentional action (for law, the fulcrum of human responsibility) and my commitments are Anscombian; more on this to follow....