关于意识和意志的神经基础缺乏共识如何影响有意识意志的理论化?

Amber R. Hopkins, L. Mudrik, U. Maoz
{"title":"关于意识和意志的神经基础缺乏共识如何影响有意识意志的理论化?","authors":"Amber R. Hopkins, L. Mudrik, U. Maoz","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197572153.003.0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter introduces the neuroscientific study of consciousness, volition, and conscious volition, discussing the lack of consensus and other obstacles neuroscientists face in identifying their neural bases. It describes how theoretical frameworks and philosophical work come into play toward this end. The chapter also discusses the importance of collaboration between neuroscientists and philosophers, zooming out and reflecting on differences between progress in philosophy and progress in neuroscience.","PeriodicalId":11169,"journal":{"name":"Determinism and Free Will","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How does the absence of a consensus about the neural basis of consciousness and volition affect theorizing about conscious volition?\",\"authors\":\"Amber R. Hopkins, L. Mudrik, U. Maoz\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780197572153.003.0026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter introduces the neuroscientific study of consciousness, volition, and conscious volition, discussing the lack of consensus and other obstacles neuroscientists face in identifying their neural bases. It describes how theoretical frameworks and philosophical work come into play toward this end. The chapter also discusses the importance of collaboration between neuroscientists and philosophers, zooming out and reflecting on differences between progress in philosophy and progress in neuroscience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Determinism and Free Will\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Determinism and Free Will\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197572153.003.0026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Determinism and Free Will","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197572153.003.0026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本章介绍了意识、意志和有意识意志的神经科学研究,讨论了神经科学家在识别其神经基础时缺乏共识和其他障碍。它描述了理论框架和哲学工作如何在这一目标中发挥作用。本章还讨论了神经科学家和哲学家之间合作的重要性,缩小并反映了哲学进步和神经科学进步之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How does the absence of a consensus about the neural basis of consciousness and volition affect theorizing about conscious volition?
This chapter introduces the neuroscientific study of consciousness, volition, and conscious volition, discussing the lack of consensus and other obstacles neuroscientists face in identifying their neural bases. It describes how theoretical frameworks and philosophical work come into play toward this end. The chapter also discusses the importance of collaboration between neuroscientists and philosophers, zooming out and reflecting on differences between progress in philosophy and progress in neuroscience.
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
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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