Abstract

The paper deals with some issues that underlie the four questions formulated by Iacoviello (2016) in his comment to the target article by Sartori and Zangrossi (2016) on forensic neuroscience. Iacoviello's dissatisfaction for the lack of dialogue between science and law is discussed within a larger framework: i.e., by referring to the disciplinary fragmentation of scientific objects, at the expense of the development of coherent and organized forms of knowledge.