Skip to content
neurophilosophy
EntityQ1807987· pop 16· linked from 356 articles

neurophilosophy

Sign in to save

Also known as philosophy of neuroscience

Neurophilosophy, or the philosophy of neuroscience, is the interdisciplinary study of neuroscience and philosophy that explores the relevance of neuroscientific studies to the arguments traditionally categorized as philosophy of mind. Recent scientific discourse elucidates the distinction between "neurophilosophy" and "philosophy of neuroscience".

~36 min read

Encyclopedic overview

22 sections
Contents
  • Specific issues
  • Indirectness of studies of the mind and brain
  • fMRI
  • Rejections of fMRI
  • Reverse inference
  • Pure insertion
  • Resting-state functional-connectivity MRI
  • Methodological issues
  • Dissociation in cognitive neuropsychology
  • Single-unit recordings
  • Computational neuroscience
  • Relations between psychological and neuroscientific inquiries
  • Computation and representation in the brain
  • Historical overview
  • Representation
  • Views on computation
  • List of neurophilosophers
  • See also
  • Notes
  • References
  • Further reading
  • External links

Neurophilosophy, or the philosophy of neuroscience, is the interdisciplinary study of neuroscience and philosophy that explores the relevance of neuroscientific studies to the arguments traditionally categorized as philosophy of mind. Recent scientific discourse elucidates the distinction between "neurophilosophy" and "philosophy of neuroscience".

upright|thumb|Patricia Churchland The term was coined by Patricia Churchland in her book, Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind–Brain, which was published in 1986 by the MIT Press. Churchland was driven by the mind-body problem, which asks a highly-debated question of how the mind, which drives intangible, nonphysical mental processes, is related to the brain, a physical organ. This problem extends to the understanding of other relatively unknown phenomena, such as decision making, learning, consciousness, existence of free will, as well as other related topics. Churchland originally theorized that the physical brain was clearly relevant and, more importantly, necessary to discovering the nonphysical mind and its related mental processes since the only thing that exists is the physical brain. These beliefs were initially met with contention from contemporary philosophers, who typically misinterpreted her argument. Instead of understanding her argument as "necessary," many philosophers often implied that Churchland argued that a neural underpinning was both "necessary" and "sufficient." This line of thought is not without historical context as many classical philosophers, such as Plato, Descartes, and Chalmers, argued that mind and brain have no connection. Contemporary philosophers often argue that the many undiscovered problems in neuroscience will never allow a mechanism into solving cognition. Churchland argues that proponents of this belief do not understand that the field of neuroscience is relatively young and is bound by the unknowns of chemistry and physics. The philosophy of neuroscience attempts to clarify neuroscientific methods and results using the conceptual rigor and methods of philosophy of science.

Excerpted from Wikipedia’s “neurophilosophy” article, available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence.

Gallery (2)