Consiliência e a possibilidade do neurodireito: da desconfiança à reconciliação disciplinar

Abstract

The paper aims to revisit the origin of the disciplinary gap that occurs between Natural Sciences, Social Sciences and Humanities, by revisiting classic literature in English language tradition throughout the XX century (in particular, the provocative lecture by Percy Snow and, in the same tradition, the subsequent Wilson/Lewontin controversy). This departure led to the current model of hyper-specialization which, although it has promoted a remarkable advance in each one of the disciplines, had as a consequence the fragmentation of the own knowledge and the loss of the coherence between each one of these parts. This model shows signs of exhaustion, since it is not able to face fundamental philosophical questions, nor to present satisfactory solutions to the great human problems of contemporaries. In this context, we present Consilience, which proposes the recovery of coherence between all branches of knowledge, both in the task of knowing our own humanity and in the task of presenting answers to these great problems. As a conclusion, it has been realized that, for the Law, this movement of approximation can have disruptive consequences, since the explanations of the Cognitive Sciences for the human behavior can defy fundamental notions with which the Law operates. To equate all this is the task that is attributed to the Neuro-Right. The originality of the article lies in the recovery of the origins for the disciplinary removal, and the reasons for its overcoming, always within the context of the Law. This revision brought light to the task of making all this knowledge coherent, or consilient. Within Legal Sciences, this is the task belongs to Neurolaw.