Poiesis and Praxis 2 (1):29-40 (2003)
|Abstract||In its predominant form, the understanding of the neurosciences, which stand in high public esteem, is a naturalistic one. The critique of this naturalism concerns the technical modelling of brain functions as a syntactic or control loop machine. Adequate solutions to the mind-body problem are not found in this way. An alternative exists in the shape of the methodical-culturalistic approach, which describes the neurosciences as human practice, modelled on the pragmatism of medicine: Starting from (diagnosed and described) defects, the medical practitioner searches for the causes of the disorder. The neuroscientistâs naÃ¯ve focus on the central nervous system is replaced by the reflection on the actions and objectives of the neuroscientist himself. This results in a number of conclusions with regard to human/animal comparisons and to the importance of brain research for the self-image of human beings, for instance concerning free will|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
A. Smith (1986). Brain-Mind Philosophy. Inquiry 29 (June):203-15.
William P. Bechtel, Pete Mandik, Jennifer Mundale & Robert S. Stufflebeam (eds.) (2001). Philosophy and the Neurosciences: A Reader. Blackwell.
Andrea Lavazza & Mario De Caro (2010). Not so Fast. On Some Bold Neuroscientific Claims Concerning Human Agency. Neuroethics 3 (1):23-41.
Antti Revonsuo (2001). On the Nature of Explanation in the Neurosciences. In Peter K. Machamer, Peter McLaughlin & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Wpress.
Ilya B. Farber & Patricia S. Churchland (1995). Consciousness and the Neurosciences: Philosophical and Theoretical Issues. In Michael S. Gazzaniga (ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences. Mit Press.
William Bechtel, Pete Mandik & Jennifer Mundale (2001). Philosophy Meets the Neurosciences. In William P. Bechtel, Pete Mandik, Jennifer Mundale & Robert S. Stufflebeam (eds.), Philosophy and the Neurosciences: A Reader. Blackwell.
H. Cruse (2001). The Explanatory Power and Limits of Simulation Models in the Neurosciences. In Peter K. Machamer, Peter McLaughlin & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Arthur J. Dyck & Carlos Padilla (2009). The Empathic Emotions and Self-Love in Bishop Joseph Butler and the Neurosciences. Journal of Religious Ethics 37 (4):577-612.
Nicholas D. Schiff (2004). The Neurology of Impaired Consciousness: Challenges for Cognitive Neuroscience. In Michael S. Gazzaniga (ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences. Mit Press.
Tilo Kircher & Anthony S. David (2003). Self-Consciousness: An Integrative Approach From Philosophy, Psychopathology and the Neurosciences. In Tilo Kircher & Anthony S. David (eds.), The Self in Neuroscience and Psychiatry. Cambridge University Press.
David J. Chalmers (2004). How Can We Construct a Science of Consciousness? In Michael S. Gazzaniga (ed.), The Cognitive Neurosciences Iii. Mit Press.
Benoît Dubreuil (2009). Des Neurosciences à la Philosophie. Neurophilosophie Et Philosophie des Neurosciences Pierre Poirier Et Luc Faucher, Dir. Paris, Éditions Syllepse, 2008, 528 Pp. [REVIEW] Dialogue 48 (04):902-.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads2 ( #246,081 of 722,867 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?