Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-17T13:38:39.901Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interpreting neuroscience and explaining the mind

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 1999

Ian Gold  and
Daniel Stoljar
Ian Gold
Affiliation:
Institute of Advanced Studies, Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, [email protected] www.coombs.anu.edu.au/Depts/RSSS/People/IanGold.html Department of Ophthalmology, Royal Victoria Hospital, Room H414, 687 avenue des Pins ouest, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 1A1 [email protected]
Daniel Stoljar
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy and Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309 [email protected] Institute of Advanced Studies, Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, [email protected] www.coombs.anu.edu.au/Depts/RSSS/People/Stoljar.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although a wide variety of questions were raised about different aspects of the target article, most of them fall into one of five categories each of which deals with a general question. These questions are (1) Is the radical neuron doctrine really radical? (2) Is the trivial neuron doctrine really trivial? (3) Were we sufficiently critical of the radical neuron doctrine? (4) Is there a distinction to be drawn at all between the two doctrines? and (5) How does our argument bear on related issues in the ontology of mind? Our replies to the objections and observations presented are organized around these five questions.

Type
Authors' Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 22 , Issue 5 , October 1999 , pp. 856 - 866
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)