首页> 外文学位 >Reconstructing science and re-imagining our conscious mind: Putting neuropragmatism to work.
【24h】

Reconstructing science and re-imagining our conscious mind: Putting neuropragmatism to work.

机译:重构科学并重新想象我们的意识:将神经实用主义发挥作用。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

I address the recognized but largely unexamined affinity between the evolutionary philosophies of John Dewey and Daniel C. Dennett, in order to resolve a problematic tension within Dennett's naturalism that results from his emphasis and dependence on science without having a proper account of science. Briefly, many of Dennett's critics argue that this neglect results in the neopragmatic relativism of Richard Rorty. I argue that there is another alternative by making use of John Dewey's philosophy of inquiry. The role of experimental inquiry is neglected by Rorty yet is central to Dewey's project of reconstruction, as opposed to the neurophilosophical and neopragmatic project of reconciling what Wilfrid Sellars called the scientific and manifest images of humanity. In promoting reconstruction as opposed to reconciliation, the tension in both Dennett and much contemporary neurophilosophy is simply evaded. Moreover, the conflict between the sciences and the humanities can be ameliorated through an emphasis on experimental method. In presenting this neurophilosophical pragmatism, I not only continue Dennett's project of imagining new metaphors for consciousness, I meet Rorty's challenge to Dennett to reconstruct science in light of the new metaphors for consciousness -- yet I do so in a way that does not simply reduce science to literature as Rorty professed. This first lengthy presentation of neuropragmatism promises to advance not only rapprochement between science and the humanities but also points a way forward for pragmatism in the twenty-first century that takes seriously the advances in the sciences of life and mind without succumbing to the dangers of much of the neuro-hype found both inside and outside of philosophical circles.
机译:我要解决约翰·杜威和丹尼尔·C·丹内特的进化哲学之间公认但基本上未经检验的亲和力,以解决丹尼特自然主义中的一个有问题的张力,这种张力是由于他对科学的强调和依赖而没有适当地说明科学造成的。简而言之,许多丹尼特的批评家认为,这种疏忽导致了理查德·罗蒂的新实用主义相对论。我认为利用约翰·杜威的探究哲学还有另一种选择。罗尔(Rorty)忽略了实验探究的作用,但对杜威(Dowey)的重建计划至关重要,与神经哲学和新实用主义的计划(威尔弗里德·塞拉斯(Wilfrid Sellars)称赞人类的科学形象)相反。在促进重建而不是和解中,登尼特和许多当代神经哲学的紧张都被简单地规避了。此外,可以通过强调实验方法来缓解科学与人文科学之间的冲突。在介绍这种神经哲学的实用主义时,我不仅继续了Dennett设想想象的新隐喻的项目,还遇到了Rorty挑战Dennett根据新的意识隐喻来重建科学的挑战,但我这样做的方式不只是减少罗蒂自称对文学科学。关于神经实用主义的首次漫长陈述,不仅有望促进科学与人文科学之间的和解,而且还为二十一世纪的实用主义指明了前进的方向,该实用主义认真地对待了生命科学和思想科学的发展,而没有顾及很多东西的危险。在哲学界内部和外部都发现了神经炒作。

著录项

  • 作者

    Solymosi, Tibor Ryan.;

  • 作者单位

    Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.;

  • 授予单位 Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.;Philosophy of Science.;Biology Neuroscience.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2012
  • 页码 295 p.
  • 总页数 295
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号