PENN LAW — In a recently published article at Criminal Law and Philosophy, the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School’s Ferdinand Wakeman Hubbell Professor of Law Stephen J. Morse challenges the characterization of executive function as a guiding mechanism that supports both responsible agency and the necessity for some excuses. Executive function is the umbrella term psychologists use to include abilities that enable purposive, goal-oriented, successful behavior. These include the capacities to initiate and plan behavior, to focus attention, and to self-monitor and self-regulate, including inhibition of inappropriate desires and actions. In response to Responsible Brains, a book authored by William Hirstein, Katrina L. Sifferd, and Tyler K. Fagan of Elmhurst College, Morse writes that executive function is “not the universal acid and that neuroscience at present contributes almost nothing to the necessary psychological level of explanation and analysis.” In “Is Executive Function the Universal Acid?” Morse explores what executive function is and what neuroscience can add to our understanding of it.