Human nature and neurosciences: a methodical cultural criticism of naturalism in the neurosciences
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 naïve 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 | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesA. Smith (1986). Brain-Mind Philosophy. Inquiry 29 (June):203-15.
Andrea Lavazza & Mario De Caro (2010). Not so Fast. On Some Bold Neuroscientific Claims Concerning Human Agency. Neuroethics 3 (1).
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.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-09-02Total downloads2 ( #232,211 of 548,969 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
