Neurolaw

After the discussion this evening, I found this article on the NPR website. It's about a neuroscientist named Jim Fallon. He tested his family, including some extended family, for the equivalent (I think) of the Warrior and Psychopath genes that Brad referred to tonight (the psychopath tendency actually wasn't a genetic test, but a brain scan). Apparently, there is a third factor that can mediate the psychopath and warrior predispositions. According to the article:

Jim Fallon says he had a terrific childhood; he was doted on by his parents and had loving relationships with his brothers and sisters and entire extended family.

Significantly, he says this journey through his brain has changed the way he thinks about nature and nurture. He once believed that genes and brain function could determine everything about us. But now he thinks his childhood may have made all the difference.
"We'll never know, but the way these patterns are looking in general population, had I been abused, we might not be sitting here today," he says.

As for the psychopaths he studies, Fallon feels some compassion for these people who, he says, got "a bad roll of the dice."

"It's an unlucky day when all of these three things come together in a bad way, and I think one has to empathize with what happened to them," he says.
But what about people who rape and murder — should we feel empathy for them? Should they be allowed to argue in court that their brains made them do it? Enter the new world of "neurolaw" — in which neuroscience is used as evidence in the courtroom.

 Just wanted to share. Interesting world of neuroscience where there are physical tests that can detect tendencies or likelihoods. But as this article points out, that's sometimes not the whole story. However, I suppose if we can access all factors, including the way we are treated in our childhood, would we be justified in taking measures to limit the possible damage - or ...what?