Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:36:15.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Methodological Issues in Neuroethics: The Case of Responsibility and Psychopathy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2021

Luca Malatesti  and
John McMillan
Luca Malatesti*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Rijeka, 51000Rijeka, Croatia
John McMillan
Affiliation:
Bioethics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin9054, New Zealand
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There are some distinct methodological challenges, and possible pitfalls, for neuroethics when it evaluates neuroscientific results and links them to issues such as moral or legal responsibility. Some problems emerge in determining the requirements for responsibility. We will show how philosophical proposals in this area need to interact with legal doctrine and practice. Problems can occur when inferring normative implications from neuroscientific results. Other problems arise when it is not recognized that data about brain anatomy or physiology are relevant to the ascription of responsibility only when they are significantly correlated with the psychological capacities contemplated by the legal formulations of responsibility. We will demonstrate this by considering two significant cases concerning psychopathy. Some paradigms that aim at measuring higher-order capacities, such as moral understanding, have limited validity. More robust paradigms for the study of learning in restricted controlled conditions, on the other hand, have limited ecological validity across individuals and context to be of any use for the law.

Keywords

methods of neuroethicsresponsibilitypsychopathyinsanity defense
Type
Articles
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , October 2021 , pp. 681 - 693
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Racine, E, Aspler, J. Section introduction: Focus, theories, and methodologies in neuroethics. In: Racine, E, Aspler, J, eds. Debates about Neuroethics: Perspectives on Its Development, Focus, and Future. Cham: Springer; 2017:85–7. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54651-3_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Clausen, J, Levy, N, eds. Handbook of Neuroethics. Cham: Springer; 2015.Google Scholar

3. Evers, K, Salles, A, Farisco, M. Theoretical framing of neuroethics: The need for a conceptual approach. In: Racine, E, Aspler, J, eds. Debates about Neuroethics: Perspectives on Its Development, Focus, and Future. Cham: Springer; 2017:89–107. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54651-3_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. Morse, SJ. Brain overclaim syndrome and criminal responsibility: A diagnostic note. Social Science Research Network; 2006; available at https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=896753 (last accessed 9 Oct 2019).Google Scholar

5. Morse, SJ, Roskies, AL. A Primer on Criminal Law and Neuroscience: A Contribution of the Law and Neuroscience Project Supported by the MacArthur Foundation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013; available at http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=5567677 (last accessed 5 Oct 2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. Vincent, NA, ed. Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Fischer, J, Ravizza, M. Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. De Ridder, D, Verplaetse, J, Vanneste, S. The predictive brain and the “free will” illusion. Frontiers in Psychology 2013;4. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

9. Brembs, B. Towards a scientific concept of free will as a biological trait: Spontaneous actions and decision-making in invertebrates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2011;278(1707):930–9; available at http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/cgi/doi/10.1098/rspb.2010.2325 (last accessed 4 Sept 2017).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

10. Wegner, DM. The Illusion of Conscious Will. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Center for Disease Control. Traumatic Brain Injury in Prisons and Jails; 2007:5; available at https://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/pdf/Prisoner_TBI_Prof-a.pdf (last accessed 10 May 2019).Google Scholar

12. Kiehl, KA, Sinnott-Armstrong, WP, eds. Handbook on Psychopathy and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.Google Scholar

13. Malatesti, L, McMillan, J, eds. Responsibility and Psychopathy: Interfacing Law, Psychiatry and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. doi:10.1093/med/9780199551637.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. Patrick, CJ, ed. Handbook of Psychopathy. 2nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press; 2018.Google Scholar

15. Hare, RD. The Hare Psychopathy Checklist—Revised. 2nd ed. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems; 2003. doi:10.1037/t01167-000.Google Scholar

16. See note 15, Hare 2003.

17. Fowler, KA, Lilienfeld, SO. Alternatives to psychopathy checklist—revised. In: Kiehl, KA, Sinnott-Armstrong, WP, eds. Handbook on Psychopathy and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:34–57.Google Scholar

18. Jalava, J, Griffiths, S, Maraun, M. The Myth of the Born Criminal. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19. Jefferson, A, Sifferd, K. Are psychopaths legally insane? European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 2018;14(1):79–96. doi:10.31820/ejap.14.1.5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. Malatesti, L, Jurjako, M, Meynen, G. The insanity defence without mental illness? Some considerations. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 2020;71:101571. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2020.101571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

21. Jurjako, M, Malatesti, L. Neuropsychology and the criminal responsibility of psychopaths: Reconsidering the evidence. Erkenntnis 2018;83(5):1003–25. doi:10.1007/s10670-017-9924-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22. Gacono, CB. The Clinical and Forensic Assessment of Psychopathy: A Practitioners Guide; 2016; available at http://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315764474 (last accessed 10 Dec 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. Duff, A. Psychopathy and moral understanding. American Philosophical Quarterly 1977;14(3):189–200.Google Scholar

24. Murphy, JG. Moral death: A Kantian essay on psychopathy. Ethics 1972;82(4):284–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25. Deigh, J. Empathy and universalizability. Ethics 1995;105(4):743–63. doi:10.1086/293751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26. Fine, C, Kennett, J. Mental impairment, moral understanding and criminal responsibility: Psychopathy and the purposes of punishment. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 2004;27(5):425–43. doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2004.06.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27. Levy, N. Psychopaths and blame: The argument from content. Philosophical Psychology 2014;27(3):351–67. doi:10.1080/09515089.2012.729485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

28. Morse, SJ. Psychopathy and criminal responsibility. Neuroethics 2008;1(3):205–12. doi:10.1007/s12152-008-9021-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29. Malatesti, L. Moral understanding in the psychopath. Synthesis Philosophica 2010;24(2):337–48.Google ScholarPubMed

30. Glannon, W. Psychopathy and responsibility. Journal of Applied Philosophy 1997;14(3):263–75. doi:10.1111/1468-5930.00062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31. Glannon, W. Moral responsibility and the psychopath. Neuroethics 2008;1:158–66. doi:10.1007/s12152-008-9012-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32. Jalava, J, Griffiths, S. Philosophers on psychopaths: A cautionary tale in interdisciplinarity. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology 2017;24(1):1–12. doi:10.1353/ppp.2017.0000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33. Maibom, HL. The mad, the bad, and the psychopath. Neuroethics 2008;1(3):167–84. doi:10.1007/s12152-008-9013-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. McMillan, J. The Methods of Bioethics: An Essay in Meta-Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35. See note 24, Murphy 1972.

36. See note 25, Deigh 1995.

37. Nichols, S. How psychopaths threaten moral rationalism. The Monist 2002;85(2):285–303. doi:10.5840/monist200285210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38. See note 34, McMillan 2018.

39. Penney, S. Impulse control and criminal responsibility: Lessons from neuroscience. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 2012;35(2):99–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

40. Meynen, G. Legal Insanity: Explorations in Psychiatry, Law, and Ethics. Vol 71. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44721-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

41. Yannoulidis, S. Mental State Defences in Criminal Law. Farnham: Ashgate; 2012.Google Scholar

42. Bartlett, P. Stabbing in the dark: English law relating to psychopathy. In: Malatesti, L, McMillan, J, eds. Responsibility and Psychopathy: Interfacing Law, Psychiatry and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010:25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

43. Jurjako, M. Is psychopathy a harmful dysfunction? Biology & Philosophy 2019;34(5). doi:10.1007/s10539-018-9668-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

44. Malatesti, L, Baccarini, E. The disorder status of psychopathy. In: Malatesti, L, McMillan, J, Šustar, P, eds. Psychopathy. Its Uses, Validity, and Status. Cham: Springer; in press.Google Scholar

45. Malatesti, L. Psychopathy and failures of ordinary doing. Etica e Politica 2014;16(2):1138–52.Google Scholar

46. Graham, G. The Disordered Mind: An Introduction to Philosophy of Mind and Mental Illness. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47. Nadelhoffer, T, Sinnott-Armstrong, WP. Is psychopathy a mental disease? In: Vincent, NA, ed. Neuroscience and Legal Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:229–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48. Glenn, AL, Raine, A, Laufer, WS. Is it wrong to criminalize and punish psychopaths? Emotion Review 2011;3(3):302–4. doi:10.1177/1754073911402372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

49. See note 28, Morse 2008.

50. McMillan, J. Psychiatric ethics. In: LaFollette, H, ed. International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013:4186–95.Google Scholar

51. Stevens, GP. The role of impulse control disorders in assessing criminal responsibility: Medico-legal perspectives from South Africa. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 2016;23(3):413–29. doi:10.1080/13218719.2015.1080145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52. Aharoni, E, Funk, C, Sinnott-Armstrong, W, Gazzaniga, M. Can neurological evidence help courts assess criminal responsibility? Lessons from law and neuroscience. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2008;1124:145–60. doi:10.1196/annals.1440.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

53. Sifferd, KL, Hirstein, W. On the criminal culpability of successful and unsuccessful psychopaths. Neuroethics 2013;6(1):129–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

54. Cruft, R, Kramer, MH, Reiff, MR. Crime, Punishment, and Responsibility the Jurisprudence of Antony Duff. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55. Duff, A. Psychopathy and answerability. In: Malatesti, L, McMillan, J, eds. Responsibility and Psychopathy: Interfacing Law, Psychiatry and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010:198–212; available at http://oxfordmedicine.com/view/10.1093/med/9780199551637.001.0001/med-9780199551637-chapter-011 (last accessed 5 Feb 2019).Google Scholar

56. Packer, IK. Evaluation of Criminal Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

57. See note 56, Packer 2009.

58. Hirstein, W, Sifferd, K. The legal self: Executive processes and legal theory. Consciousness and Cognition 2011;20(1):156–71. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.10.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

59. Sifferd, KL. Translating scientific evidence into the language of the “folk”: Executive function as capacity-responsibility. In: Vincent, NA, ed. Legal Responsibility and Neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.Google Scholar

60. Morse, SJ. Moral and legal responsibility and the new neuroscience. In: Illes, J, ed. Neuroethics: Defining the Issues in Theory, Practice, and Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006:33–50; available at https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567219.001.0001/acprof-9780198567219-chapter-3 (last accessed 7 Oct 2019).Google Scholar

61. Morse, SJ. The non-problem of free will in forensic psychiatry and psychology. Behavioral Sciences & the Law 2007;25(2):203–20. doi:10.1002/bsl.744.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

62. Lennon, K. Reasons and causes. In: Guttenplan, S, ed. A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind. London: Blackwell; 1994:531–5.Google Scholar

63. Millar, A. Understanding People: Normativity and Rationalizing Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007 doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199254408.001.0001.Google Scholar

64. Taylor, C. Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1989.Google Scholar

65. Scanlon, T. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1998.Google Scholar

66. See note 60, Morse 2006.

67. Yang, Y, Raine, A. Prefrontal structural and functional brain imaging findings in antisocial, violent, and psychopathic individuals: A meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research 2009;174(2):81–8. doi:10.1016/j.pscychresns.2009.03.012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

68. Blair, RJR, Mitchell, DR, Blair, K. The Psychopath: Emotion and the Brain. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 2005.Google Scholar

69. Fallon, J. The Psychopath Inside: A Neuroscientist’s Personal Journey into the Dark Side of the Brain. New York: The Penguin Group; 2013.Google Scholar

70. Rosnow, RL, Rosenthal, R. Beginning Behavioral Research: A Conceptual Primer. Harlow: Prentice Hall; 2008.Google Scholar

71. Slobogin, C. Proving the Unprovable: The Role of Law, Science, and Speculation in Adjudicating Culpability and Dangerousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.Google Scholar

72. Levy, N. The responsibility of the psychopath revisited. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology 2007;14(2):129–38. doi:10.1353/ppp.0.0003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

73. Shoemaker, DW. Psychopathy, responsibility, and the moral/conventional distinction. Southern Journal of Philosophy 2011;49(1 Suppl):99–124. doi:10.1111/j.2041-6962.2011.00060.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

74. Turiel, E. The Development of Social Knowledge: Morality and Convention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1983.Google Scholar

75. Blair, RJR. A cognitive developmental approach to morality: Investigating the psychopath. Cognition 1995;57(1):1–29. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(95)00676-P.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

76. Blair, RJR. Moral reasoning and the child with psychopathic tendencies. Personality and Individual Differences 1997;22(5):731–9. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00249-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77. Blair, RJR, Monson, J, Frederickson, N. Moral reasoning and conduct problems in children with emotional and behavioural difficulties. Personality and Individual Differences 2001;31(5):799–811. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00181-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

78. Kelly, D, Stich, S, Haley, KJ, Eng, SJ, DMT, Fessler. Harm, affect, and the moral/conventional distinction. Mind 2007;22(2):117–31. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00302.x.Google Scholar

79. Aharoni, E, Sinnott-Armstrong, W, Kiehl, KA. Can psychopathic offenders discern moral wrongs? A new look at the moral/conventional distinction. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 2012;121(2):484–97. doi:10.1037/a0024796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

80. Aharoni, E, Sinnott-Armstrong, W, Kiehl, KA. What’s wrong? Moral understanding in psychopathic offenders. Journal of Research in Personality 2014; 53:175–81. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2014.10.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

81. Dolan, MC, Fullam, RS. Moral/conventional transgression distinction and psychopathy in conduct disordered adolescent offenders. Personality and Individual Differences 2010;49(8):995–1000. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.08.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82. Maibom, HL. Moral unreason: The case of psychopathy. Mind and Language 2005;20:237–57. doi:10.1111/j.0268-1064.2005.00284.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

83. Brazil, IA, Maes, J, Scheper, I, Bulten, BH, RPC, Kessels, Verkes, RJ, et al. Reversal deficits in individuals with psychopathy in explicit but not implicit learning conditions. Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience 2013;38(4):E13–E20. doi:10.1503/jpn.120152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

84. Koenigs, M, Newman, JP. The decision-making impairment in psychopathy: Psychological and neurobiological mechanisms. In: Kiehl, KA, Sinnott-Armstrong, W, eds. Handbook on Psychopathy and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:93–106.Google Scholar

85. Blair, RJR, Colledge, E, Mitchell, DGV. Somatic markers and response reversal: Is there orbitofrontal cortex dysfunction in boys with psychopathic tendencies? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 2001;29(6):499–511. doi:10.1023/A:1012277125119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

86. Blair, RJR. The neurobiology of psychopathic traits in youths. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2013;14(11):786–99. doi:10.1038/nrn3577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

87. Brazil, IA, Cima, M. Contemporary approaches to psychopathy. In: Cima, M, ed. The Handbook of Forensic Psychopathology and Treatment. London: Routledge; 2016:206–26.Google Scholar

88. Baskin-Sommers, AR, Curtin, JJ, Newman, JP. Emotion-modulated startle in psychopathy: Clarifying familiar effects. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 2013;122(2):458–68. doi:10.1037/a0030958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

89. Jurjako, M, Malatesti, L. Instrumental rationality in psychopathy: Implications from learning tasks. Philosophical Psychology 2016;29(5):717–31. doi:10.1080/09515089.2016.1144876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar