Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
foundational.
ThegoalofRobertPoczobut’sMind,Emergence,andtheLimits
ofNeuroscientificExplanationsistodeterminetheroleof
philosophyinthecontextofneuroscientificdevelopmentsandto
revealthelimitsofneuroscientificexplanationofmental
phenomena.Poczobutunderscoresthatneuroscienceisapartof
abroaderresearchprogramofcognitivescience.Furthermore,he
believesthatwithintheso-called‘philosophyinthecontextof
neuroscience’oneshoulddistinguishbetweenneurophilosophy
(whichappliesneuroscientificfindingstoclassicalphilosophical
issues)andthephilosophyofneuroscience(aspecializedbranchof
philosophyofscience).Poczobutalsoanalyzestheimportantroleof
theconceptofemergence,whichenablesonetotakeintoaccount
therelationsbetweendifferentlevelsoforganizationofcognitive
phenomena.Heconcludesthatalthoughneuroscientificexplanation
providesinvaluableinsightsattheneuralleveloforganization,itis
insufficientforacomprehensiveaccountofmentalphenomena.
ThesubsequentchapterTheoreticalUnificationandtheNeural
EngineeringFrameworkbyMarcinMiłkowskiisanattemptto
answerthequestionofwhethertheNeuralEngineeringFramework
(NEF)isapossibleunifyingframeworkofexplanationincognitive
neuroscience.AccordingtoPhilipKitcher,onecandealwiththe
objectionstothereceivedviewofscientificexplanation(the
covering-lawaccountdevelopedbyCarlHempelandPaul
Oppenheim)intwodistinctways:bydispensingwiththeargument-
likestructureoftheexplanationandsavingitscausalcharacter,or
byacceptingtheargument-likestructureandrejectingtheconceptof
alaw.AfteranalyzingseveralcounterexamplestoKitcher’s
unificationaccount,Miłkowskiarguesthatisnotanadequate
backgroundfortestingNEF’sexplanatorypower.Miłkowskiclaims
furtherthatNEFexhibitsthepropertiesofframeworksthatcanserve
asmeansoftheoreticalunification.Onthebasisoftwocasestudies,
onepertainingtotheresearchonthenavigationalcapabilitiesofrats
