Metascience, Not Metaphysics, of Neuroscience

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 0 PHILOSOPHY
J. Bickle
{"title":"Metascience, Not Metaphysics, of Neuroscience","authors":"J. Bickle","doi":"10.53765/20512201.29.7.175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I recommend replacing Piccinini's elaborate metaphysics that grounds his approach in Neurocognitive Mechanisms with metascience. Reconceived as metascience, Piccinini's discussion of numerous case studies from recent neuroscience in his book's final chapters makes a strong case for\n his proposal that current neuroscience trades in neural representations and a special kind of computation over them. But I contrast this account with what a metascience focused on recent developments in 'molecular and cellular cognition' reveals, namely an account that no longer has use for\n 'levels', a notion that has long infected new mechanism and remains prominent in Piccinini's latest contribution.","PeriodicalId":47796,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Consciousness Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Consciousness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53765/20512201.29.7.175","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

I recommend replacing Piccinini's elaborate metaphysics that grounds his approach in Neurocognitive Mechanisms with metascience. Reconceived as metascience, Piccinini's discussion of numerous case studies from recent neuroscience in his book's final chapters makes a strong case for his proposal that current neuroscience trades in neural representations and a special kind of computation over them. But I contrast this account with what a metascience focused on recent developments in 'molecular and cellular cognition' reveals, namely an account that no longer has use for 'levels', a notion that has long infected new mechanism and remains prominent in Piccinini's latest contribution.
神经科学的元科学,而非形而上学
我建议用元科学取代皮奇尼尼精心设计的形而上学,后者为他在神经认知机制中的方法奠定了基础。Piccinini被认为是元科学,他在书的最后几章中对最近神经科学的许多案例研究进行了讨论,为他提出的当前神经科学以神经表征和对其进行特殊计算为交易提供了有力的理由。但我将这一观点与专注于“分子和细胞认知”最新发展的元科学所揭示的观点进行了对比,即一种不再使用“水平”的观点,这一概念长期以来一直感染着新的机制,并在Piccinini的最新贡献中仍然突出。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
58
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信