Category: neuroscience

  • The Ethics of Pathos, Part II

    In The Ethics of Pathos, Part I I discussed Walter Olson’s ethical question, “Should lawyers trying cases make an appeal to jurors’ reptile brains?” While writing that post I came to the conclusion that it’s not unethical to use even the darkest of persuasive arts (I’m a student of hypnosis and other trial technologies) to […]

  • The Ethics of Pathos, Part I

    Over at Overlawyered Walter Olson asks, “Should lawyers trying cases make an appeal to jurors’ ‘reptile brains’?” In writing about Reptile Trials in Lizards Don’t Laugh, I hadn’t even considered this question. If Walter’s were a practical “should” question—”will it sometimes benefit clients for lawyers trying cases to appeal to jurors’ reptile brains?”—then the answer […]

  • Lizards Don’t Laugh.

    Personal injury lawyer Paul Luvera has written about Applying Reptile Concepts in Trial—describing how plaintiffs’ lawyers should appeal to jurors’ reptile brains. The reptile brain is the core of the human brain, sitting right at the top of the spine surrounded by the later-developing dog brain and ape brain. The reptile brain is a survival […]

  • Naptime in the Courtroom

    Last weekend I read Brain Rules, by John Medina. It’s a slender book concisely describing 12 of the principles that govern how our brains work, and suggesting ways that businesses and schools might take advantage of these principles to help employees and students perform and learn better. As knowledge workers and creative workers, we should […]

  • I Thought I was an Infomaniac . . .

    . . . but it turns out that I’m just normally infovorous. USC professor Irving Biederman writes: Gaze at something that leads to a novel interpretation . . . and that will spur higher levels of associative activity in opioid-dense areas. We are thus thrilled when new insights tap into what we have previously learned. […]