Abstract
In “Minds, Brains, and Norms,” Michael Pardo and Dennis Patterson claim that the idea that ‘you are your brain’ does not contribute to a plausible account of human behavior. I argue that they leave too little of the brain in their account of different types of behavior.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Emphasis added.
See [3]
Op. cit., n. 3 above, sec. 580.
References
Pardo, M. S., and D. Patterson. 2010. Minds, brains, and norms. Neuroethics 3: ??.
Wittgenstein, L. 1958. Philosophical Investigations, 3rd ed., trans. G. E. M. Anscombe. New York: Macmillan, 208.
Bunge, S.A., and J.D. Wallis (eds.). 2008. Neuroscience of rule-guided behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Scoville, W.B., and B. Milner. 1957. Loss of recent memory after bilateral hippocampal lesions. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 20: 11–21.
Damasio, H., T. Grabowski, R. Frank, A.M. Galabarda, and A. Damasio. 1994. The return of Phineas Gage: clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient. Science 264: 1102–1105.
Damasio, A. 2004. Descartes error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain, Ch. 1. New York: Grosett/Putnam.
Burns, J.M., and R.H. Swerdlaw. 2003. Right orbitofrontal tumor with pedophilia symptom and constructional apraxia. Archives of Neurology 62: 437–440.
Roskies, A.L. 2008. Neuroimaging and inferential distance. Neuroethics 1(1): 19–30.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Walter Sinnott-Armstrong for helpful comments and suggestions on an earlier version of this article. The writing of this article was supported in part by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, NNF 80045, States of Mind: Emerging Issues in Neuroethics.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Glannon, W. Brain, Behavior, and Knowledge. Neuroethics 4, 191–194 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-010-9081-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-010-9081-5