Below is a fascinating and enlightening 51-minute interview of Thomas Nadelhoffer by Harvard Law Student Brian Wood. The interview, titled “Developments in Neuroscience and their Implications for Criminal Law,” lasts just over 51 minutes. It was conducted the Law and Mind Science Seminar at Harvard (taught by Situationist Editor Jon Hanson).
Situationist Contributor Dr. Thomas Nadelhoffer was born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia. He has earned degrees in philosophy from The University of Georgia (BA), Georgia State University (MA), and Florida State University (PhD). Since 2006, he has been an assistant professor of philosopy and a member of the law and policy faculty at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He is currently at Duke University as a Visiting Scholar in the Kenan Institute for Ethics.
His main areas of research include moral psychology, the philosophy of action, free will, punishment theory, and neurolaw. He is particularly interested in research at the cross roads of philosophy and the sciences of the mind. His articles have appeared in journals such as Analysis, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Mind & Language, Neuroethics, and Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. He is the coordinator of the blogs Flickers of Freedom and the Law and Neuroscience Blog. He is also a contributing author to blogs such as The Situationist, The Leiter Reports, and Experimental Philosophy.
* * *
* * *
Table of contents:
- What have you been working on recently? 0:22
- What are some areas of the legal system in which this science is relevant? 1:07
- What are the problems with the traditional approaches to using science in the criminal system, and how are new scientific methods relevant to fixing them? 2:15
- How could these newer scientific methods be employed? 4:09
- What are the rationales society has traditionally cited as justifying criminal punishment? 6:55
- Can you explain what Compatibalism is? 10:17
- Aren’t there problems with notions of moral responsibility under Compatibalism? 12:26
- How do neuroscience, Compatibalism, and determinism relate to our notions of law? 12:55
- What do you see as the problems with the classic approaches to punishment? 15:25
- Is there anything especially strange about Retributivism to you? 20:37
- Can you detail what you believe to be the just reasons for punishment and how society can punish people more justly? 23:41
- In your view, how would you punish psychopaths under the consequentialist rationale? 30:40
- Can you give an example of the distinctions psychopaths cannot draw? 34:50
- What’s the most interesting experiment you have conducted? 37:01
- Do you think these participants just misunderstood what determinism is? 38:15
- What qualities do you believe you and other researchers and philosophers need to be successful? 40:03
- How has what you have learned through your research influenced the way you live you life? 41:35
- How do you see the relationship of law and mind science developing in the future? 44:55