Beyond the epistemological wall. Methodological notes to deal with neurosciences' discoveries

Abstract

This paper addresses some of the growing interactions among different fields of scientific knowledge, especially focusing on the complex links between neuroscience and law under the lens of criminal responsibility. It ponders on some crucial issues: how to deal with the chance to blend in disparate forms of knowledge? In light of which methods and arguments a choice among divergent disciplinary contributions is legitimate? This work suggests a dialectical approach to rationally frame these epistemological connections, to foster the critical meeting of diverse perspectives, and thus favour the emergence of valuable common spaces: the Socratic method. Thereby, a functional balance among different scientific dimensions is possibly reachable, overcoming the "epistemological wall" between social and natural sciences. Thus, even in the legal sphere, one should not a priori discard neurosciences' relevance and results, albeit this might require a hint of "neuromodesty" and critical thinking.