神经性别歧视、神经女权主义和神经中心主义:从性别思维到具体思维

Pub Date : 2022-12-19 DOI:10.1080/08038740.2022.2155244
C. Halberg
{"title":"神经性别歧视、神经女权主义和神经中心主义:从性别思维到具体思维","authors":"C. Halberg","doi":"10.1080/08038740.2022.2155244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Over the course of the last decade, a strand of feminist science scholarship has come together under the rubric of “neurofeminism”. One of the driving concerns for scholars in this area is to expose and criticize what is sometimes called “neurosexism”. This is a tendency among some neuroscientists, science writers and journalists to exaggerate cognitive, emotional, and behavioural sex differences and to pin gender stereotypes on allegedly innate sex differences of brain structure and function. The standard neurofeminist response has operated largely within the framework of the nature vs. nurture problematic, emphasizing the lack of attention to the role played by experience-dependent neuroplasticity in the development of a gendered brain. I propose to reframe this debate using resources from the philosophy of mind. I argue that several issues driving this debate hinge on the more fundamental question of how the role of the brain in behaviour should be conceptualized. In this regard, I show how neurosexism assumes neurocentrism—which I explicate as the transposition of the Cartesian immaterial soul onto the material brain—as its philosophical foundation, and I develop the case against this assumption, drawing in part on the enactive approach to the philosophy and science of the mind.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neurosexism, Neurofeminism, and Neurocentrism: From Gendered Brains to Embodied Minds\",\"authors\":\"C. Halberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08038740.2022.2155244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Over the course of the last decade, a strand of feminist science scholarship has come together under the rubric of “neurofeminism”. One of the driving concerns for scholars in this area is to expose and criticize what is sometimes called “neurosexism”. This is a tendency among some neuroscientists, science writers and journalists to exaggerate cognitive, emotional, and behavioural sex differences and to pin gender stereotypes on allegedly innate sex differences of brain structure and function. The standard neurofeminist response has operated largely within the framework of the nature vs. nurture problematic, emphasizing the lack of attention to the role played by experience-dependent neuroplasticity in the development of a gendered brain. I propose to reframe this debate using resources from the philosophy of mind. I argue that several issues driving this debate hinge on the more fundamental question of how the role of the brain in behaviour should be conceptualized. In this regard, I show how neurosexism assumes neurocentrism—which I explicate as the transposition of the Cartesian immaterial soul onto the material brain—as its philosophical foundation, and I develop the case against this assumption, drawing in part on the enactive approach to the philosophy and science of the mind.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740.2022.2155244\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740.2022.2155244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在过去的十年里,一系列女权主义科学研究以“神经女权主义”为主题。这一领域的学者们最关心的问题之一是揭露和批评有时被称为“神经症”的东西。一些神经科学家、科学作家和记者倾向于夸大认知、情感和行为性别差异,并将性别刻板印象归咎于大脑结构和功能的先天性别差异。标准的神经女权主义反应主要在先天与后天问题的框架内运作,强调缺乏对经验依赖性神经可塑性在性别化大脑发育中所起作用的关注。我建议利用心灵哲学的资源来重新构建这场辩论。我认为,推动这场辩论的几个问题取决于一个更基本的问题,即大脑在行为中的作用应该如何概念化。在这方面,我展示了神经错乱是如何将神经中心主义作为其哲学基础的——我将其解释为笛卡尔非物质灵魂到物质大脑上的换位——并且我在一定程度上借鉴了思维哲学和科学的行为方法,提出了反对这一假设的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Neurosexism, Neurofeminism, and Neurocentrism: From Gendered Brains to Embodied Minds
ABSTRACT Over the course of the last decade, a strand of feminist science scholarship has come together under the rubric of “neurofeminism”. One of the driving concerns for scholars in this area is to expose and criticize what is sometimes called “neurosexism”. This is a tendency among some neuroscientists, science writers and journalists to exaggerate cognitive, emotional, and behavioural sex differences and to pin gender stereotypes on allegedly innate sex differences of brain structure and function. The standard neurofeminist response has operated largely within the framework of the nature vs. nurture problematic, emphasizing the lack of attention to the role played by experience-dependent neuroplasticity in the development of a gendered brain. I propose to reframe this debate using resources from the philosophy of mind. I argue that several issues driving this debate hinge on the more fundamental question of how the role of the brain in behaviour should be conceptualized. In this regard, I show how neurosexism assumes neurocentrism—which I explicate as the transposition of the Cartesian immaterial soul onto the material brain—as its philosophical foundation, and I develop the case against this assumption, drawing in part on the enactive approach to the philosophy and science of the mind.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
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