首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Innovation in Aging >Why Cognitive Sciences Do Not Prove That Free Will Is an Epiphenomenon
【2h】

Why Cognitive Sciences Do Not Prove That Free Will Is an Epiphenomenon

机译:为什么认知科学不能证明自由意志是一种现象

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Is epiphenomenalism virtually entailed by the current empirical knowledge about how the mind/brain causes human behavior? I'll address this question by highlighting that recent discoveries in empirical psychology and neuroscience actually do not strike the final blow to the notions of free will and intentional agency. Indeed, most of the experiments that purport to show that our behavior is unconscious and automatic do not prove that it is indeed the case and that therefore we do not have free will. There are many reasons for this, including the fact that those experiments focus on a specific range of our behavior, one that manifests a significant correlation between unconscious priming and decisions or reactions. However, this doesn't mean that the entire range of our relevant behavior works the same way. It can be argued that there are situations of higher relevance in which we are fully conscious of our decisions or, at least, there are decisions such that psychological experiments cannot prove them to always be unconscious and automatic. However, the epiphenomenalist challenge may suggest that we should abandon some of the suppositions implied by a traditional idea of free will.
机译:关于心/脑如何引起人类行为的当前经验知识,实际上是否牵涉到表观现象呢?我将通过强调在经验心理学和神经科学方面的最新发现实际上并未对自由意志和故意代理的概念产生最后的打击来解决这个问题。确实,大多数旨在证明我们的行为是无意识的和自动的实验并不能证明事实确实如此,因此我们没有自由意志。造成这种情况的原因有很多,其中包括那些实验着重于我们行为的特定范围这一事实,这表明无意识启动与决策或反应之间存在显着相关性。但是,这并不意味着我们相关行为的整个范围都以相同的方式起作用。可以说,在某些高度相关的情况下,我们完全意识到自己的决定,或者至少存在一些决定,使得心理实验无法证明它们总是无意识和自动的。但是,表观主义者的挑战可能表明,我们应该放弃传统的自由意志观念所隐含的某些假设。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号