Giving up on convergence and autonomy: Why the theories of psychology and neuroscience are codependent as well as irreconcilable

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A:1-19 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a long-standing debate in the philosophy of mind and philosophy of science regarding how best to interpret the relationship between neuroscience and psychology. It has traditionally been argued that either the two domains will evolve and change over time until they converge on a single unified account of human behaviour, or else that they will continue to work in isolation given that they identify properties and states that exist autonomously from one another (due to the multiple-realizability of psychological states). In this paper, I argue that progress in psychology and neuroscience is contingent on the fact that both of these positions are false. Contra the convergence position, I argue that the theories of psychology and the theories of neuroscience are scientifically valuable as representational tools precisely because they cannot be integrated into a single account. However, contra the autonomy position, I propose that the theories of psychology and neuroscience are deeply dependent on one another for further refinement and improvement. In this respect, there is an irreconcilable codependence between psychology and neuroscience that is necessary for both domains to improve and progress. The two domains are forever linked while simultaneously being unable to integrate.

Similar books and articles

Autonomous psychology: What it should and should not entail.William P. Bechtel - 1984 - Philosophy of Science Association 1984:43 - 55.
Mind in Perspective: Psychology or Neuroscience?Marie-Helene Remy - 1990 - Dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook
Autonomy and multiple realization.Robert C. Richardson - 2008 - Philosophy of Science 75 (5):526-536.
What price neurophilosophy?Eric Saidel - 1992 - Philosophy of Science Association 1:461-68.
Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience.Max R. Bennett & P. M. S. Hacker - 2003 - Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell. Edited by P. M. S. Hacker.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-10-26

Downloads
1,368 (#7,822)

6 months
104 (#35,997)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eric Hochstein
University of Victoria

References found in this work

Word and Object.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1960 - Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.
Origins of Objectivity.Tyler Burge - 2010 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Intention, plans, and practical reason.Michael Bratman - 1987 - Cambridge: Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

View all 53 references / Add more references