Von dem Buch The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience haben wir 3 gleiche oder sehr ähnliche Ausgaben identifiziert!
Falls Sie nur an einem bestimmten Exempar interessiert sind, können Sie aus der folgenden Liste jenes wählen, an dem Sie interessiert sind:
100%: Peter A. Alces: The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience (ISBN: 9780226513676) 2018, in Englisch, auch als eBook.Nur diese Ausgabe anzeigen…
100%: Peter A. Alces: The Moral Conflict Of Law And Neuroscience (ISBN: 9780226513362) 2017, University of Chicago Press, in Englisch, Broschiert.Nur diese Ausgabe anzeigen…
71%: Rita Anne Rollins Professor of Law Peter a Alces: The Moral Conflict and Neuroscience (ISBN: 9780226513539) 2017, The University of Chicago Press, in Englisch, Taschenbuch.Nur diese Ausgabe anzeigen…
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience - 9 Angebote vergleichen
Bester Preis: € 22,81 (vom 10.02.2018)1
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience
EN PB NWISBN: 9780226513539 bzw. 022651353X, in Englisch, The University of Chicago Press, Taschenbuch, neu.
New insights offered by neuroscience have provoked discussions of the nature of human agency and responsibility. These insights suggest that the idea that humans are uniquely capable of making their own choices and thus should be held responsible for their consequences might be little more than a fiction, according to Peter A. Alces. Law, which relies on a shared, intuitive "folk psychology" about the capacity of humans to make conscious choices in all but a few cases where age, sanity, and emotional distress are seen as limiting human agency, will need to take into consideration broader biological findings when assigning responsibility for specific acts. As we seek to better understand our brains, this research will inevitably inform, and change, the rules society lives by. Alces draws on neuroscience to explore the internal contradictions of legal doctrines, and consider what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging understandings of human capacities and characteristics not only in criminal law but in contract and tort law.
2
The Moral Conflict Of Law And Neuroscience
EN NWISBN: 9780226513362 bzw. 022651336X, in Englisch, University of Chicago Press, neu.
Lieferung aus: Kanada, In Stock, plus shipping.
Peter A. Alces, Books, Reference and Language, The Moral Conflict Of Law And Neuroscience, Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and others and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights.
Peter A. Alces, Books, Reference and Language, The Moral Conflict Of Law And Neuroscience, Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and others and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights.
3
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience (2018)
EN NW EB DLISBN: 9780226513676 bzw. 022651367X, in Englisch, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, neu, E-Book, elektronischer Download.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, in-stock.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will-and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will-and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights.
4
Symbolbild
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience (2017)
EN HC NWISBN: 9780226513362 bzw. 022651336X, in Englisch, 368 Seiten, University Of Chicago Press, gebundenes Buch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, Not yet published.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.com.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and others and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights., Hardcover, Label: University Of Chicago Press, University Of Chicago Press, Product group: Book, Published: 2017-12-22, Studio: University Of Chicago Press.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.com.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and others and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights., Hardcover, Label: University Of Chicago Press, University Of Chicago Press, Product group: Book, Published: 2017-12-22, Studio: University Of Chicago Press.
5
Symbolbild
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience (2017)
EN PB NWISBN: 9780226513539 bzw. 022651353X, in Englisch, 368 Seiten, University Of Chicago Press, Taschenbuch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, Not yet published.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.com.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and others and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights., Paperback, Label: University Of Chicago Press, University Of Chicago Press, Product group: Book, Published: 2017-12-22, Studio: University Of Chicago Press.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.com.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and others and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights., Paperback, Label: University Of Chicago Press, University Of Chicago Press, Product group: Book, Published: 2017-12-22, Studio: University Of Chicago Press.
6
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience (2017)
EN PB NWISBN: 9780226513539 bzw. 022651353X, in Englisch, 368 Seiten, University Of Chicago Press, Taschenbuch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, Not yet published.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.com.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights., Paperback, Label: University Of Chicago Press, University Of Chicago Press, Product group: Book, Published: 2017-12-22, Studio: University Of Chicago Press, Sales rank: 3273727.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.com.
Law relies on a conception of human agency, the idea that humans are capable of making their own choices and are morally responsible for the consequences. But what if that is not the case? Over the past half century, the story of the law has been one of increased acuity concerning the human condition, especially the workings of the brain. The law already considers select cognitive realities in evaluating questions of agency and responsibility, such as age, sanity, and emotional distress. As new neuroscientific research comprehensively calls into question the very idea of free will, how should the law respond to this revised understanding? Peter A. Alces considers where and how the law currently fails to appreciate the neuroscientific revelation that humans may in key ways lack normative free will—and therefore moral responsibility. The most accessible setting in which to consider the potential impact of neuroscience is criminal law, as certain aspects of criminal law already reveal the naiveté of most normative reasoning, such as the inconsistent treatment of people with equally disadvantageous cognitive deficits, whether congenital or acquired. But tort and contract law also assume a flawed conception of human agency and responsibility. Alces reveals the internal contradictions of extant legal doctrine and concludes by considering what would be involved in constructing novel legal regimes based on emerging neuroscientific insights., Paperback, Label: University Of Chicago Press, University Of Chicago Press, Product group: Book, Published: 2017-12-22, Studio: University Of Chicago Press, Sales rank: 3273727.
7
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience
EN NW EBISBN: 9780226513676 bzw. 022651367X, in Englisch, University of Chicago Press, neu, E-Book.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, In Stock.
The-Moral-Conflict-of-Law-and-Neuroscience~~Peter-a-Alces, The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience, NOOK Book (eBook).
The-Moral-Conflict-of-Law-and-Neuroscience~~Peter-a-Alces, The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience, NOOK Book (eBook).
8
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience
EN PB NWISBN: 9780226513539 bzw. 022651353X, in Englisch, University of Chicago Press, Taschenbuch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika, In Stock, plus shipping.
The-Moral-Conflict-of-Law-and-Neuroscience~~Peter-a-Alces, The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience, Paperback.
The-Moral-Conflict-of-Law-and-Neuroscience~~Peter-a-Alces, The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience, Paperback.
9
The Moral Conflict of Law and Neuroscience (2017)
EN PB NWISBN: 9780226513539 bzw. 022651353X, in Englisch, 368 Seiten, University Of Chicago Press, Taschenbuch, neu.
Lieferung aus: Kanada, Not yet published.
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.ca.
Die Beschreibung dieses Angebotes ist von geringer Qualität oder in einer Fremdsprache. Trotzdem anzeigen
Von Händler/Antiquariat, Amazon.ca.
Die Beschreibung dieses Angebotes ist von geringer Qualität oder in einer Fremdsprache. Trotzdem anzeigen
Lade…