Francken Jolien C, Slors Marc
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Department of Philosophy, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Conscious Cogn. 2014 Oct;29:248-58. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.08.019. Epub 2014 Oct 6.
Commonsense cognitive concepts (CCCs) are the concepts used in daily life to explain, predict and interpret behaviour. CCCs are also used to convey neuroscientific results, not only to wider audiences but also to the scientific inner circle. We show that translations from CCCs to brain activity, and from brain data to CCCs are made in implicit, loose and unsystematic ways. This results in hard to connect data as well as possibly unwarranted extrapolations. We argue that the cause of these problems is a covert adherence to a position known in philosophy of mind as 'mental realism'. The most fruitful way forward to a clearer and more systematic employment of CCCs in cognitive neuroscience, we argue, is to explicitly adopt interpretivism as an alternative for mental realism. An interpretative stance will help to avoid conceptual confusion in cognitive science and implies caution when it comes to big conclusions about CCCs.
常识认知概念(CCCs)是日常生活中用于解释、预测和阐释行为的概念。CCCs还被用于传达神经科学研究结果,不仅面向更广泛的受众,也面向科学界内部人士。我们发现,从CCCs到大脑活动以及从大脑数据到CCCs的转换是以隐含、松散且不系统的方式进行的。这导致数据难以关联,还可能产生无根据的推断。我们认为,这些问题的根源在于暗中坚持心灵哲学中被称为“心理实在论”的立场。我们认为,在认知神经科学中更清晰、更系统地运用CCCs的最有效方法是明确采用解释主义来替代心理实在论。一种解释性立场将有助于避免认知科学中的概念混淆,并在涉及关于CCCs的重大结论时意味着谨慎。