Wanna talk about how I’m seriously starting my lit review any minute now?!!

Wanna talk about how I’m seriously starting my lit review any minute now?!!

[Giving] rise to the question of the free will to do evil: Advances in neuroscience may result in a device that makes it impossible for a person to complete a particular action; say murder or rape. The use of such a device would require careful thought and ethical review. Do we have the right to remove the ability to make a choice, even a wrong choice from another person?
Arguing that We Have No Free Will [via]. The irony being that you may not have control over your actions, but someone else could. 
Guilty, but not responsible? Any scientific developments that threatened our notion of free will would seem to put the ethics of punishing people for their bad behaviour in question. In Free Will Harris debates these ideas and asks whether or not, given what brain science is telling us, criminal justice, in focusing on retribution, rests on an entirely false basis. An example he gives is a murderer who kills because of a brain tumour. This person is a victim, not a criminal. The tumour is the cause of his crimes. People imagine that the normal brain is a different story. But in fact the study of any criminal brain, says Harris, is the equivalent of finding a tumour in it – the wrong genes being transcribed, the brain being dictated by events over which he has no control. Human choice, says Harris, “…is as important as fanciers of free will believe. But the next choice you make will come out of the darkness of prior causes that you, the conscious witness of your experience, did not bring into being.” Clearly we need to lock up dangerous people. But there is no sense to the idea that they somehow deserve it. Retributive justice is like requiring us to hate, as well as shoot, a wild animal who escapes from the zoo.”  When we say lock up, are we still talking about punishment?  Inside the forensic hospitals I have visited, there is a brick-solid tension between staff and inmates/patients as to how to treat them. A common dilemma the staff struggles with is should they been treat the prisoners as medical patients and deliver care since they are generally not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) or should they be treated like as captured monsters, since dangerous behavior IS what landed them there? Staff safety is a major concern obviously.  Taking a tip from Norway, a novel change would be a path toward first treating them like humans- since no matter what they did/how heinous it was - that’s all they are.

Guilty, but not responsible?

Any scientific developments that threatened our notion of free will would seem to put the ethics of punishing people for their bad behaviour in question. In Free Will Harris debates these ideas and asks whether or not, given what brain science is telling us, criminal justice, in focusing on retribution, rests on an entirely false basis. An example he gives is a murderer who kills because of a brain tumour. This person is a victim, not a criminal. The tumour is the cause of his crimes. People imagine that the normal brain is a different story. But in fact the study of any criminal brain, says Harris, is the equivalent of finding a tumour in it – the wrong genes being transcribed, the brain being dictated by events over which he has no control. Human choice, says Harris,

“…is as important as fanciers of free will believe. But the next choice you make will come out of the darkness of prior causes that you, the conscious witness of your experience, did not bring into being.”

Clearly we need to lock up dangerous people. But there is no sense to the idea that they somehow deserve it. Retributive justice is like requiring us to hate, as well as shoot, a wild animal who escapes from the zoo.” 

When we say lock up, are we still talking about punishment?  Inside the forensic hospitals I have visited, there is a brick-solid tension between staff and inmates/patients as to how to treat them. A common dilemma the staff struggles with is should they been treat the prisoners as medical patients and deliver care since they are generally not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) or should they be treated like as captured monsters, since dangerous behavior IS what landed them there? Staff safety is a major concern obviously.  Taking a tip from Norway, a novel change would be a path toward first treating them like humans- since no matter what they did/how heinous it was - that’s all they are.

Hello, Thanks for a great tumblr. I subscribed to the Neuro Ethics blog, as well. In your post from 1/5/12 on the neuroscience of desire, the second link (entitled "Somebody a long time ago had it right") is dead because a video has been removed from youtube. Is it possible to tell me what video this was? I feel certain I can find it elsewhere on the web. Thanks again, Karen — Asked by thoughtfulcynic

Times like this I wish I had a more profound answer, but it’s just a jam supporting the article and my strong interest in getting a 70’s stewardess outfit & slinking around with an eye-patched Brian Ferry or the like. 

Link fixed, and thank you.

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

177 plays

awordoraline:

Hector Lavoe - El Dia De Mi Suerte


AutoLavoe RB. There’s something very healing about dancing to something so relavent.

“estoy cansado de tanto esperar, y estoy seguro que mi suerte cambiara

…pero ¿cuando será?” …right?

awordoraline

Sea level. Scottfriday says: sí. level. Can’t argue with solid logic.

Sea level.
Scottfriday says: sí. level.
Can’t argue with solid logic.

Last day of finals tomorrow. The Last Judgement, detail of satan devouring the damned in hell, by Fra Angelico c. 1431.

Last day of finals tomorrow.

The Last Judgement, detail of satan devouring the damned in hell, by Fra Angelico c. 1431.

In The Web gets Smarter, Gary Marcus writes: Google’s algorithm doesn’t know a thing about doubled letters, transpositions, or the psychology of how humans type or spell, only what people tend to type after they make an error. The lesson, it seemed, was that with a big enough database and fast enough computers, human problems could be solved without much insight into the particulars of the human mind.  I’ve always like the how more than the why anyway. More, here.

In The Web gets Smarter, Gary Marcus writes:

Google’s algorithm doesn’t know a thing about doubled letters, transpositions, or the psychology of how humans type or spell, only what people tend to type after they make an error. The lesson, it seemed, was that with a big enough database and fast enough computers, human problems could be solved without much insight into the particulars of the human mind.

 I’ve always like the how more than the why anyway. More, here.

Research idea accepted! 

Research idea accepted! 

[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]

358 plays

War on my data analysis project, 2nd ed.

THE WAR ON fMRI DATA ANALYSIS

THE WAR ON fMRI DATA ANALYSIS

American Journal of Insanity, 1844 [via]  …edited by the officers of the NYS Lunatic Asylum.  TRUSTY!

American Journal of Insanity, 1844 [via]  …edited by the officers of the NYS Lunatic Asylum.  TRUSTY!

Write exactly what you would want to read, what you wish someone else had written.

Neuroscientist, David Eagleman replying to: “What advice would you give to an aspiring author?” [via]  

 …Meanwhile: this ol blog she aint what she used to be, aint what she used to be…

Mo on Phineas Gage’s connectome ..neuroscientists from the University of California, Los Angeles have produced Gage’s connectome - a detailed wiring diagram of his brain, showing how its long-range connections were altered by the injury. Using CT scans, MRI and DTI, researchers have come up with a model of Gage’s brain and the trajectory of the rod, showing what areas would have likely been damaged (interesting) but still leaving questions as to the extent/duration of the damage. I’ve heard a lot of mehs about the connectome project, and I know people that won’t even talk about it’s possible/potential usefulness, but I suppose that’s to be expected right out the gate. sigh. Read Mo Costandi’s article here.

Mo on Phineas Gage’s connectome

..neuroscientists from the University of California, Los Angeles have produced Gage’s connectome - a detailed wiring diagram of his brain, showing how its long-range connections were altered by the injury.

Using CT scans, MRI and DTI, researchers have come up with a model of Gage’s brain and the trajectory of the rod, showing what areas would have likely been damaged (interesting) but still leaving questions as to the extent/duration of the damage. I’ve heard a lot of mehs about the connectome project, and I know people that won’t even talk about it’s possible/potential usefulness, but I suppose that’s to be expected right out the gate. sigh.

Read Mo Costandi’s article here.