1.
Politics and International Relations - LibGuides at University of Exeter. http://libguides.exeter.ac.uk/PoliticsHomePage
2.
Hart HLA. The Concept of Law. Vol Clarendon law series. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2012.
3.
Dworkin R. Law’s Empire. Hart; 1998.
4.
Fuller LL. ‘The Case of the Speluncean Explorers’ [in] Harvard Law Review. Harvard Law Review. 1949;62(4):616-645. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/1336025
5.
King ML. Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Published 1963. http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
6.
Exodus 19-24. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+19-24
7.
King LW. The Code of Hammurabi. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
8.
Chan W tsit. ‘The Natural Way of Lao Tzu’ [in] A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. In: A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Vol Source Books in Asian Philosophy. Princeton University Press; 1963:136-151. https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b4953ab4-24be-e711-80cb-005056af4099
9.
Hoff B. The Tao of Pooh: The Principles of Taoism Demonstrated by Winnie-the-Pooh. Egmont; 2015.
10.
Weinrib EJ. ‘Legal Formalism: On the Immanent Rationality of Law’ [in] Yale Law Journal. Yale Law Journal. 1988;97(6). https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/796339
11.
Llewellyn KN. ‘A Realistic Jurisprudence: The Next Step’ [in] Columbia Law Review. Columbia Law Review. 1930;30(4):431-465. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/1114548
12.
Hart HLA. Chapter 1: ‘Persistent Questions’ [in] The Concept of Law. In: The Concept of Law. Vol Clarendon law series. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2012:1-17. https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=eef320da-3fbe-e711-80cb-005056af4099
13.
Hart HLA. Chapter V: ‘Law as the Union of Primary and Secondary Roles’ [in] The Concept of Law. In: The Concept of Law. Vol Clarendon law series. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2012:79-99. https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=5a467892-40be-e711-80cb-005056af4099
14.
Hart HLA. Chapter VI: ‘The Foundations of a Legal System’ [in] The Concept of Law. In: The Concept of Law. Vol Clarendon law series. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2012:100-123.
15.
Hart HLA. Chapter VII: ‘Formalism and Rule-Scepticism’ [in] The Concept of Law. In: The Concept of Law. Vol Clarendon law series. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2012:124-154.
16.
Dworkin R. Chapter 1: ‘What is Law?’ [in] Law’s Empire. In: Law’s Empire. Hart; 1998:1-44.
17.
Dworkin R. Chapter 2: ‘Interpretive Concepts’ [in] Law’s Empire. In: Law’s Empire. Hart; 1998:45-86.
18.
Dworkin R. Chapter 3: ‘Jurisprudence Revisited’ [in] Law’s Empire. In: Law’s Empire. Hart; 1998:87-113.
19.
Dworkin R. Chapter 4: ‘Conventionalism’ [in] Law’s Empire. In: Law’s Empire. Hart; 1998:114-150.
20.
Hart HLA. ‘Postscript’ [in] The Concept of Law. In: The Concept of Law. Vol Clarendon law series. Third edition. Oxford University Press; 2012:238-276.
21.
Dennett DC. Chapter 1: ‘Natural Freedom’ [in] Freedom Evolves. In: Freedom Evolves. Penguin books; 2004:1-23.
22.
Dennett DD. Chapter 2: ‘A Tool for Thinking about Determinism’ [in] Freedom Evolves. In: Freedom Evolves. Penguin books; 2004:25-62. https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b31cecd2-49be-e711-80cb-005056af4099
23.
Rosen J. ‘The Brain on the Stand: How Neuroscience is Transforming the Legal System’ [in] New York Times. New York Times (1923-Current file). Published online 2007. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/hnpnewyorktimes/docview/848120400/fulltextPDF/567B0DF6A7E64C8APQ/2?accountid=10792
24.
Kelkar K. ‘Can a Brain Scan Uncover your Morals?’ [in] The Guardian. Published online 2016. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/17/can-a-brain-scan-uncover-your-morals
25.
Gazzaniga MS, Steven MS. ‘Free Will in the Twenty-First Century’ [in] Neuroscience and the Law: Brain, Mind, and the Scales of Justice. In: Neuroscience and the Law: Brain, Mind, and the Scales of Justice. Dana Press; 2004:51-70.
26.
Fugelsang J, Dunbar K. ‘A Cognitive Neuroscience Framework for Understanding Causal Reasoning and the Law’ [in] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2004;359(1451):1749-1754. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/359/1451/1749
27.
Vilares I, Wesley MJ, Ahn WY, et al. ‘Predicting the Knowledge–Recklessness Distinction in the Human Brain’ [in] Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(12):3222-3227. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.pnas.org/content/114/12/3222
28.
Hoffman MB. ‘The Neuroeconomic Path of the Law’ [in] Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2004;359(1451):1667-1676. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/359/1451/1667
29.
Aharoni E, Vincent GM, Harenski CL, et al. ‘Neuroprediction of Future Rearrest’ [in] Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2013;110(15):6223-6228. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.pnas.org/content/110/15/6223
30.
Jones OD. ‘Law and Neuroscience’ [in] Journal of Neuroscience. Journal of Neuroscience. 2013;33(45):17624-17630. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jneurosci.org/content/33/45/17624
31.
Churchland PS. ‘Reviewed Work: The Ethical Brain by Michael S. Gazzaniga’ [in] American Scientist. American Scientist. 2005;93(4):356-359. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/27858612
32.
Churchland PS. ‘Moral Decision-Making and the Brain’ [in] Neuroethics. In: Neuroethics. Oxford University Press; 2004:3-16. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198567219.001.0001/acprof-9780198567219-chapter-1
33.
Goodenough OR, Prehn K. ‘A Neuroscientific Approach to Normative Judgment in Law and Justice’ [in] Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. 2004;359(1451):1709-1726. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/4142156
34.
Goodenough OR. ‘Responsibility and Punishment: Whose Mind? A Response’ [in] Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. 2004;359(1451):1805-1809. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/4142165
35.
Greene J, Cohen J. ‘For the Law, Neuroscience Changes Nothing and Everything’ [in] Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences. 2004;359(1451):1775-1785. https://uoelibrary.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/4142162
36.
Morse SJ. ‘New Neuroscience, Old Problems: Legal Implications of Brain Science’ [in] Cerebrum. Published online 2004. http://www.dana.org/Cerebrum/Default.aspx?id=39169
