| dc.description.abstract | This Master's thesis faces the task of delineating the main aspects that circumvent neuroscience and guilt under the aegis of Criminal Law. Concern takes place precisely in the conclusions of current neuroscientific experiments, which trace aspects about human behavior and behavior through the instigating neuroscientific discoveries that reveal new information about the functioning of the human brain, influencing, in the field of Criminal Law, intrinsically in guilt. Therefore, the objective of this work is to investigate the possible impacts produced by the neuroscientific advances in the scope of criminal dogmatics, mainly about the institute of guilt. In this scenario of recent discoveries, the objective is also to demonstrate how dangerous it can be to receive the results of brain science that end up defending the foundations of neurodeterminism, which would have the power to propagate the inapplicability of "being able to act the other way, "thereby rejecting self-determination and, consequently, abolishing the whole sense of guilt. As a result, the path to be covered will be detailed, since it will have as its first approach the evolution of historical antecedents to the contemporary perspective of the concept of criminal-legal guilt. The third chapter, in turn, will present the current conceptions of guilt, while the latter will investigate how neuroscientific advances can influence the issue of criminal-legal guilt. The work will have as its guiding principle the hermeneutic phenomenological method and will be developed from the bibliographical research. Under this perspective, the penal system enshrined in criminal law would be threatened by the criminal policy advocated by neuroscience based on exclusively preventive imputation processes, based on security measures, resulting in the return of the unwanted criminal law of the author, thus replacing the criminal law of fact. In a close synthesis, it can not be forgotten that the study of neuroscience can also positively impact criminal dogma in the issue of criminal responsibility, finding greater adequacy in the studies of incomputability. Even if there are still uncertainties about the neuroscientific results, it is positioned, at least in theory, in Criminal Law based on guilt. | en |
