What Do Brain Data Really Show?

Philosophy of Science 69 (S3):72-82 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a bias in neuroscience toward localizing and modularizing brain functions. Single cell recording, imaging studies, and the study of neurological deficits all feed into the Gallian view that different brain areas do different things and the things being done are confined to particular processing streams. At the same time, there is a growing sentiment that brains probably don’t work like that after all; it is better to conceive of them as fundamentally distributed units, multi‐tasking at every level. This sentiment, however, is much less congenial to the tried‐and‐true experimental protocols available today and to theorizing about the brain in general. This essay examines the tension between current experimental methods and large-scale views of the brain. We argue that this disconnection between experiment and what really are guiding theoretical metaphors seriously impedes progress in neuroscience.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,932

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What do brain data really show?Valerie Gray Hardcastle & C. Matthew Stewart - 2002 - Philosophy of Science 69 (3):572-582.
Can functional brain imaging discover consciousness in the brain?Antti Revonsuo - 2001 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 8 (3):3-23.
Pushing brains: Can cognitive neuroscience provide experimental evidence for brain-mind causation?Martin Kurthen - 2010 - PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research On Consciousness 16 (2):5-22.
Phenomenological architecture of a mind and Operational Architectonics of the brain: the unified metastable continuum.Andrew A. Fingelkurts, Alexander A. Fingelkurts & Carlos F. H. Neves - 2009 - Journal of New Mathematics and Natural Computing. Special Issue on Neurodynamic Correlates of Higher Cognition and Consciousness: Theoretical and Experimental Approaches - in Honor of Walter J Freeman's 80th Birthday 5 (1):221-244.
The Neurocognition of Language.Colin M. Brown & Peter Hagoort (eds.) - 2000 - Oxford University Press UK.
Is consciousness of perception really separable from perception?Martha J. Farah - 1995 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (2):254-255.
Brain, mind, and the structure of reality.Paul L. Nunez - 2010 - New York: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-19

Downloads
23 (#671,645)

6 months
15 (#233,542)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Valerie G. Hardcastle
University of Cincinnati

Citations of this work

Images are not the evidence in neuroimaging.Colin Klein - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (2):265-278.
Philosophical issues in neuroimaging.Colin Klein - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (2):186-198.
The Analysis of Data and the Evidential Scope of Neuroimaging Results.Jessey Wright - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 69 (4):1179-1203.
Defending realism on the proper ground.Athanassios Raftopoulos - 2006 - Philosophical Psychology 19 (1):47-77.

View all 18 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Theory structure in neuroscience.Valerie Gray Hardcastle & C. Matthew Stewart - 2001 - In Peter McLaughlin, Peter Machamer & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. Pittsburgh University Press.

Add more references