Neuroscience cannot answer these questions: a response to G. and R. Murrow's essay hypothesizing a link between dehumanization, human rights abuses and public policy

Morris B. Hoffman

首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Law and the Biosciences >Neuroscience cannot answer these questions: a response to G. and R. Murrow's essay hypothesizing a link between dehumanization, human rights abuses and public policy

【24h】

Neuroscience cannot answer these questions: a response to G. and R. Murrow's essay hypothesizing a link between dehumanization, human rights abuses and public policy

机译：神经科学无法回答以下问题：对G.和R. Murrow的文章的回应假设非人性化，侵犯人权与公共政策之间存在联系

获取原文

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

The Murrows' paper, ‘A hypothetical link between dehumanization and human rights abuses', in which they propose that neuroscience may answer some difficult public policy questions, including questions about the First Amendment, is an unfortunate foray into law and public policy unjustified by the current state of neuroscience. Neuroscientific insights may one day have important implications for the law, and for some of the folk psychological assumptions embedded in the law, but they will never change the words of the written Constitution, or answer difficult policy questions in the interstices of those words. Suggesting that neuroscience can today inform these questions does a disservice to science, law and the complexity of the human condition.

机译：Murrows的论文，“非人性化与侵犯人权之间的假想联系”，他们提出神经科学可以回答一些棘手的公共政策问题，包括有关《第一修正案》的问题，这是不幸的进军法律和公共政策的过程，而后者并没有被合理化。神经科学的当前状态。神经科学的见识有一天可能对法律和法律中嵌入的某些民间心理假设有重要影响，但它们永远不会改变成文宪法的措辞，也不会在这些措辞的空隙中回答棘手的政策问题。认为神经科学今天可以解决这些问题，对科学，法律和人类状况的复杂性都是不利的。

著录项

来源
《Journal of Law and the Biosciences》 |2016年第1期|共7页
作者
Morris B. Hoffman;
展开▼
作者单位

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种
中图分类法律;
关键词

相似文献

外文文献
专利

1. Questions and Answers in Orthopaedics. For Students, Interns, Residents and Board Aspirants. By Floyd G. Goodman, B.S., M.D., and George R. Schoedinger, III, B.S., M.D., Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri. l0? x 7 in. Pp. ix + 244. 1966. St Louis: The C. V. Mosby Company. London: Henry Kimpton. Price 74s [J] . A Graham Apley The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British VolumecBritish Orthopaedic Association , Australian Orthopaedic Association , Canadian Orthopaedic Association . . . [et al] . 1967,第3期

机译：骨科问答。适用于学生，实习生，居民和董事会理想者。密苏里州圣路易斯华盛顿大学医学院骨科外科F.d.Goodman，B.S.，M.D.和George R.Schoedinger，III，B.S.，M.D. l0？ x 7英寸Pp。 ix +244。1966年。圣路易斯：The C. V. Mosby Company。伦敦：亨利·金普顿。价钱74s
2. A hypothetical neurological association between dehumanization and human rights abuses [J] . Gail B. Murrow, Richard Murrow Journal of Law and the Biosciences . 2015,第2期

机译：非人性化与侵犯人权之间的假想神经联系
3. HRDAG Answers Human Rights Questions on Large Scale [J] . Maria Gargiulo, Christine Grillo AMSTAT news . 2020,第519期

机译：HRDAG在大规模上回答人权问题
4. Unanswered questions in the development of planetary protection policy and implementation for the human exploration of Mars [C] . J Andy Spry, John Rummel, Margaret Race, IEEE Aerospace Conference . 2016

机译：在制定行星保护政策和执行人类对火星的探索中未解决的问题
5. Collisions of history and language: Nuclear weapons testing, human environmental rights abuses, and cover-up in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. [D] . Barker, Holly M. 2000

机译：历史和语言的碰撞：马绍尔群岛共和国的核武器测试，侵犯人权的环境和掩盖行为。
6. Neuroscience cannot answer these questions: a response to G. and R. Murrows essay hypothesizing a link between dehumanization human rights abuses and public policy [O] . Morris B. Hoffman 2016

机译：神经科学无法回答以下问题：对G.和R. Murrow的文章的回应假设非人性化侵犯人权与公共政策之间存在联系
7. A hypothetical neurological association between dehumanization and human rights abuses [O] . Gail B. Murrow, Richard Murrow 2015

机译：非人化与人权之间的假设神经关系

Neuroscience cannot answer these questions: a response to G. and R. Murrow's essay hypothesizing a link between dehumanization, human rights abuses and public policy

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅