000 03646nam a22004575i 4500
999 _c347235
_d347235
_x1
001 347235
003 ES-MaUEC
005 20230102120725.0
006 a||||fo|||| 00| 0
007 cr nn nnnaamaa
008 210521s2021 sz | s |||| 0|eng d
020 _a9783030710408
024 7 _a10.1007/978-3-030-71040-8
_2doi
040 _aES-MaUEC
_bspa
_cES-MaUEC
_dES-MaUEC
050 4 _aQP360.5
_b2021 EB
100 1 _aBenetka, Gerhard
_eautor
_4aut
_4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
_9680633
245 1 0 _aDiscussing Cognitive Neuroscience :
_bPsychology, Neurophysiology, and Philosophy on the Mind, Body and Brain
_cby Gerhard Benetka, Hans Werbik
250 _aFirst edition 2021
264 1 _aCham
_bSpringer International Publishing
_c2021
300 _a1 recurso en línea (VII, 171 páginas)
_b3 ilustraciones
336 _2rdacontent
_aTexto
_btxt
337 _2rdamedia
_aelectrónico
_bc
338 _2rdacarrier
_arecurso electrónico
_bcr
347 _aarchivo de texto
_bPDF
490 0 _aAnnals of Theoretical Psychology ;
_v17
490 0 _aBehavioral Science and Psychology (SpringerNature-41168)
490 0 _aBehavioral Science and Psychology (SpringerNature-43718)
505 0 _aChapter 1. Critique of neuropsychology - A polemic -- Chapter 2. Living body (Leib) or physical dataset? Antonio Damsio's and Thomas Fuchs's holistic conception of the human being as opposite standpoint to reductionist models -- Chapter 3. The person and the brain -- Chapter 4. The neuropsychological discourse in philosophical critique - Bennett/Hacker and the consequences -- Chapter 5. Persistent biologism and the misuse of neuropsychology - an activity-theoretical contribution -- Chapter 6. Measuring free will with the readiness potential? New data on an old misunderstanding -- Chapter 7. The brain as protagonist - Without the brain all is nothing -- Chapter 8. Is it possible to simulate "thought"?
520 3 _aThe sciences philosophy, psychology and neuroscience share the basis that all refer to the human being. Therefore, an interdisciplinary collaboration would be desirable. The exchange of criticism is an essential requirement for interdisciplinary collaboration. Criticism must be heard and - if possible - considered. Indeed, criticism can be valid or unwarranted. However, whether criticism is unwarranted can only emerge from discussion and conversation. In the discussion of cognitive neuroscience, some criticism can easily be considered (such as the mereological fallacy that represents that talking about the person is substituted with talking bout the brain). Another issue for an interdisciplinary discussion of cognitive neuroscience is the interpretation of the readiness potential including re-considering Benjamin Libet's classic experiments. Additionally, a critical discussion on cognitive neuroscience must address ethical questions, such as the possibility of the abuse of neuroscientific insight. .
988 _aSpringer_Psychology_2021
650 7 _2embne
_9413165
_aNeurociencia cognitiva
650 7 _2embne
_9413149
_aPsicología cognitiva
650 7 _2embne
_9140561
_aEtnopsicología
700 1 _aWerbik, Hans,
_d1941-
_eautor
_4aut
_4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
_9680634
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783030710392
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783030710415
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783030710422
856 4 0 _uhttps://go.openathens.net/redirector/universidadeuropea.es?url=https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71040-8
_zAcceso a este recurso digital (usuarios Universidad Europea de Madrid)
942 _2lcc
_cLE
998 _b01/2022
_dz
_esc
_zSI