An Evidence-Based Objection to Retributive Justice.
An Evidence-Based Objection to Retributive Justice.
Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics. Summer 2016;16(2):289-326
Authors: Mammarella BTM
Abstract
Advancements in neuroscience and related fields are beginning to show,
with increasing clarity, that certain human behaviors stem from uncontrolled,
mechanistic causes. These discoveries beg the question: If a given behavior
results from some combination of biological predispositions, neurological
circumstances, and environmental influences, is that action unwilled and
therefore absolved of all attributions of credit, blame, and responsibility? A
number of scholars in law and neuroscience who answer "yes" have considered
how the absence of free will should impact criminal law's willingness to justify
punishments on the basis of retribution, with some arguing that criminal law
ought to dispense with retributive justice because the concept of blameworthiness
is out of touch with scientific reality. This Note posits a more practical reason for
reform by reviewing available empirics on the way people perceive human
agency. The research suggests that as the science of human agency becomes
increasingly vivid and reductionistic, laypeople will become proportionally less
willing to attribute blame, and these shifting societal intuitions will ultimately
diminish criminal law's moral credibility. The practical effects of low moral
credibility might include diminished compliance, cooperation, and acquie...
Source: Yale journal of health policy, law, and ethics - Category: Medical Law Tags: Yale J Health Policy Law Ethics Source Type: research
More News: Brain | Environmental Health | Legislation | Medical Ethics | Medical Law | Neurology | Neuroscience | Science | Yale