Fads and Fallacies in the name of Cognitive Science
Maandag 2 november 2009 12:00
- 4 mensen gaan
Check ook zeker de siteWe want to discuss exaggerated and conceptually confused claims concerning results of Cognitive Science and Neuroscience. This discussion was initiated ---in our environment--- by Pieter Adriaans in a letter. Both the internet discussion and the afternoon symposium are intended as a partial fulfillment of Pieter's request for more attention to these methodological and conceptual issues.
Many popular claims stating alleged results of Cognitive Science and Neuroscience are said to be philosophically naïve, conceptually confused, or to contain elementary category mistakes. Specifically:
1. All kinds of claims that the brain does this or that (e.g. keeps watch over our body) or, even stranger, that we are our brain are misguided. They contain what has been called the homunculus fallacy.
2. Radical thought experiments like 'brain in a vat' are intrinsically misleading and should be avoided at all cost.
3. All kinds of claims by neuroscientists about their findings concerning such issues as freedom and responsibility should be taken with a huge grain of salt. The default is that such claims witness poor philosophy rather than clever experimentation.
We want to ask the participants of the internet discussion to start by stating their dogma and to provide their examples, if any, of claims from cognitive science and neuroscience deemed to be philosophically naive. Please participate in the internet discussion on www.cognitie.nl/discussion
- Wie:
- NWO
- Wat:
- Symposium
- Waar:
- http://www.indedriehoek.nl/routewijzer.html
- Wanneer:
- 2 November
- Kosten:
- Zo te zien gratis, doe wel even inschrijven op de site van NWO