Journal article icon

Journal article

Nonconsensual neurocorrectives, bypassing, and free action

Abstract:
As neuroscience progresses, we will not only gain a better understanding of how our brains work, but also a better understanding of how to modify them, and as a result, our mental states. An important question we are faced with is whether the state could be justified in implementing such methods on criminal offenders, without their consent, for the purposes of rehabilitation and reduction of recidivism; a practice that is already legal in some jurisdictions. By focusing on a prominent type of view of free action, which I call bypassing views, this paper evaluates how such interventions may negatively impact the freedom of their subjects. The paper concludes that there will be a tension between the goals of rehabilitation and reduction of recidivism, on the one hand, and the negative impact such interventions may have on free action, on the other. Other things equal, the better that a particular intervention is at achieving the former, the more likely it is to result in the latter.
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions


Access Document


Publisher copy:
10.1007/s11098-021-01740-y

Authors


More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
HUMS
Department:
Philosophy Faculty
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0002-5439-0070


Publisher:
Springer
Journal:
Philosophical Studies More from this journal
Volume:
179
Pages:
1953-1972
Publication date:
2021-09-26
Acceptance date:
2021-09-10
DOI:
EISSN:
1573-0883
ISSN:
0031-8116


Language:
English
Keywords:
Pubs id:
1198475
Local pid:
pubs:1198475
Deposit date:
2021-10-04

Terms of use



Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP