What do recent findings in neuroscience tell us about the ability of people to make moral judgments or reasoned decisions? Advances in neuroscience are being used by advocates to guide public policy on a broad range of moral and ethical issues. Is this new approach really a step forward? This year, the Supreme Court heard arguments about whether developments in neurology and our understanding of brain function should affect the constitutionality of executing 16- and 17-year-olds who commit murder. New neurological findings are now being applied to a wide range of issues—drug addiction, obesity, pornography, "lie detection," unconscious racial bias, even shopping and marketing. While there is no disputing the reality of activity patterns in the brain, the moral inferences and policy arguments being derived from our growing neurobiological knowledge raise profound questions about the nature of individual responsibility.

The first panel of this conference will address current claims of new neurotechnologies. Is there a link between neurobiology and social problems such as addiction, criminology, and social psychology? The second panel will discuss legal and moral agency issues that arise out of this new neuroscience. Does this new science undermine the concept of free will? What are the ethical problems raised by our growing understanding of the neural biology of behavior, personality, and consciousness? How is neuroscience being used in the courtroom today? What impact will these discoveries have on our legal system?