AbstractIn this paper, I argue that neuroscience not only is not complemented, but rather is positively undermined, by the substantive commitments of materialist philosophers of mind. Thus, we can have neuroscience or "neurophilosophy" but not both. Since neuroscience is a real science, to the extent that it is in tension with materialistic neurophilosophy, the latter should be abandoned and the former retained.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Similar books and articles
Methodological Problems of Neuroscience.Nicholas Maxwell - 1985 - In David Rose & Vernon Dobson (eds.), Models of the Visual Cortex. New York: Wiley.
What Can Neuroscience Bring to Education?Michel Ferrari - 2011 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (1):31-36.
The Philosophy of Neuroscience.John Bickle, Pete Mandik & Anthony Landreth - 2006 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
From Sensory Neuroscience to Neurophilosophy: Reflections on Llinas and Churchland's Mind-Brain Continuum.John Bickle - 1997 - Philosophical Psychology 10 (4):523-530.
Resisting Ruthless Reductionism: A Commentary on Bickle.Tim Bayne & Jordi FernÁndez - 2005 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4 (3):239-48.
Neuroscience and the Person: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action.Robert J. Russell (ed.) - 1998 - Center for Ttheology and the Natural Sciences.
Precis of Philosophy and Neuroscience: A Ruthlessly Reductive Account. [REVIEW]John Bickle - 2005 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4 (3):231-238.
Computational Neuroscience.Chris Eliasmith - forthcoming - In Paul R. Thagard (ed.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Psychology and Cognitive Science. Elsevier.
Cognition and the Brain: The Philosophy and Neuroscience Movement.Andrew Brook & Kathleen Akins (eds.) - 2005 - Cambridge University Press.
Can Cognitive Neuroscience Ground a Science of Learning?Anthony E. Kelly - 2011 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (1):17-23.
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
No citations found.