Back to Search

On neurosciences and law

Title	On neurosciences and law
Author	Heper, Mehmet Altan
Publication Date:	2015
Publication Place	- Seçkin Publishing
Subject	Brain research, Determinism, Indeterminism, Freedom of will, Fault, Criminal law, Brain research, Neuroscience, Determinism, Indeterminism, Freedom of will, Criminal, Law faults
Type	Periodical
Language	Turkish
Digital	Yes
Manuscript	No
Library:	Özyeğin University
Library Asset ID	1307-0851
Record ID	f44fa939-9351-4472-a41d-33b7263adfa6
Library Location	Law
Date	2015
Sample Text	Advances in brain research and neurological sciences, which intensified in the West and especially in Germany in the 90s, have reignited the old debate between determinism and indeterminism, and therefore freedom of will. Hard determinists argue that freedom of will is an illusion and suggest giving up on criminal law based on fault and resorting to security measures instead. Indeterminists emphasize the normative feature of the legal order and do not delve into the empirical nature of freedom of will. Indeterminism tries to prevent not only the criminal law based on fault, but also the entire legal order from being shaken. Regardless of whether freedom of will is proven or not, it does not seem possible for us to give up freedom of will because there is no other institution that can replace this institution and undertake this function., In the west, particularly in Germany around 90s the advanced improvement in brain research and neurology, determinism and indeterminism caused the old debate in relation to the freedom of will to arise, as a result. Determinists argued and suggested that the freedom of will is an illusion, a law which tolerates criminal law based on fault instead of the security measures that should be applied. The highlight of the indeterministic rule of law does not seem to address the empirical nature of the freedom of will. Indeterminism is not only the law which tolerates criminal law based on fault, it completely destroys the principles of the entire legal order foundations. The function to make a decision of whether the freedom of will should be exercised or not in a specific situation could be appointed to a suitable institution, but due to the lack of such an institution in existence is therefore impossible.
Cilt	10

View in source Özyeğin University Özyeğin University - Ottoman library catalog search

Özyeğin University

On neurosciences and law

Author Heper, Mehmet Altan

Publication Date 2015

Publication Place - Seçkin Publishing

Subject Brain research, Determinism, Indeterminism, Freedom of will, Fault, Criminal law, Brain research, Neuroscience, Determinism, Indeterminism, Freedom of will, Criminal, Law faults

Type Periodical

Language Turkish

Digital Yes

Manuscript No

Library Özyeğin University

Library Asset ID 1307-0851

Record ID f44fa939-9351-4472-a41d-33b7263adfa6

Library Location Law

Date 2015

Sample Text Advances in brain research and neurological sciences, which intensified in the West and especially in Germany in the 90s, have reignited the old debate between determinism and indeterminism, and therefore freedom of will. Hard determinists argue that freedom of will is an illusion and suggest giving up on criminal law based on fault and resorting to security measures instead. Indeterminists emphasize the normative feature of the legal order and do not delve into the empirical nature of freedom of will. Indeterminism tries to prevent not only the criminal law based on fault, but also the entire legal order from being shaken. Regardless of whether freedom of will is proven or not, it does not seem possible for us to give up freedom of will because there is no other institution that can replace this institution and undertake this function., In the west, particularly in Germany around 90s the advanced improvement in brain research and neurology, determinism and indeterminism caused the old debate in relation to the freedom of will to arise, as a result. Determinists argued and suggested that the freedom of will is an illusion, a law which tolerates criminal law based on fault instead of the security measures that should be applied. The highlight of the indeterministic rule of law does not seem to address the empirical nature of the freedom of will. Indeterminism is not only the law which tolerates criminal law based on fault, it completely destroys the principles of the entire legal order foundations. The function to make a decision of whether the freedom of will should be exercised or not in a specific situation could be appointed to a suitable institution, but due to the lack of such an institution in existence is therefore impossible.

Cilt 10