下载
加入VIP
  • 专属下载特权
  • 现金文档折扣购买
  • VIP免费专区
  • 千万文档免费下载

上传资料

关闭

关闭

关闭

封号提示

内容

首页 *新书上架*心理学哲学与认知科学

*新书上架*心理学哲学与认知科学.pdf

*新书上架*心理学哲学与认知科学

九月虺
2009-10-23 0人阅读 举报 0 0 0 暂无简介

简介:本文档为《*新书上架*心理学哲学与认知科学pdf》,可适用于人文社科领域

GENERALPREFACEDovGabbay,PaulThagard,andJohnWoodsWheneverscienceoperatesatthecuttingedgeofwhatisknown,itinvariablyrunsintophilosophicalissuesaboutthenatureofknowledgeandrealityScientificcontroversiesraisesuchquestionsastherelationoftheoryandexperiment,thenatureofexplanation,andtheextenttowhichsciencecanapproximatetothetruthWithinparticularsciences,specialconcernsariseaboutwhatexistsandhowitcanbeknown,forexampleinphysicsaboutthenatureofspaceandtime,andinpsychologyaboutthenatureofconsciousnessHencethephilosophyofscienceisanessentialpartofthescientificinvestigationoftheworldInrecentdecades,philosophyofsciencehasbecomeanincreasinglycentralpartofphilosophyingeneralAlthoughtherearestillphilosopherswhothinkthattheoriesofknowledgeandrealitycanbedevelopedbypurereflection,muchcurrentphilosophicalworkfindsitnecessaryandvaluabletotakeintoaccountrelevantscientificfindingsForexample,thephilosophyofmindisnowcloselytiedtoempiricalpsychology,andpoliticaltheoryoftenintersectswitheconomicsThusphilosophyofscienceprovidesavaluablebridgebetweenphilosophicalandscientificinquiryMoreandmore,thephilosophyofscienceconcernsitselfnotjustwithgeneralissuesaboutthenatureandvalidityofscience,butespeciallywithparticularissuesthatariseinspecificsciencesAccordingly,wehaveorganizedthisHandbookintomanyvolumesreflectingthefullrangeofcurrentresearchinthephilosophyofscienceWeinvitedvolumeeditorswhoarefullyinvolvedinthespecificsciences,andaredelightedthattheyhavesolicitedcontributionsbyscientificallyinformedphilosophersand(inafewcases)philosophicallyinformedscientistsTheresultisthemostcomprehensiverevieweverprovidedofthephilosophyofscienceHerearethevolumesintheHandbook:PhilosophyofScience:FocalIssues,editedbyTheoKuipersPhilosophyofPhysics,editedbyJeremyButterfieldandJohnEarmanPhilosophyofBiology,editedbyMohanMatthenandChristopherStephensPhilosophyofMathematics,editedbyAndrewIrvinePhilosophyofLogic,editedbyDaleJacquettePhilosophyofChemistryandPharmacology,editedbyAndreaWoodyandRobinHendryviDovGabbay,PaulThagard,andJohnWoodsPhilosophyofStatistics,editedbyPrasantaSBandyopadhyayandMalcolmForsterPhilosophyofInformation,editedbyPieterAdriaansandJohanvanBenthemPhilosophyofTechnologicalSciences,editedbyAnthonieMeijersPhilosophyofComplexSystems,editedbyCliffHookerandJohnCollierPhilosophyofEarthSystemsScience,editedbyBrysonBrownandKentPeacockPhilosophyofLinguistics,editedbyMartinStokhofandJeroenGroenendijkMarkRisjordPhilosophyofMedicine,editedbyFredGiffordDetailsaboutthecontentsandpublishingscheduleofthevolumescanbefoundathttp:wwwjohnwoodscaHPSAsgeneraleditors,weareextremelygratefultothevolumeeditorsforarrangingsuchadistinguishedarrayofcontributorsandformanagingtheircontributionsProductionofthesevolumeshasbeenahugeenterprise,andourwarmestthanksgotoJaneSpurrandCarolWoodsforputtingthemtogetherThanksalsotoAndyDeelenandArjenSevensteratElsevierfortheirsupportanddirectionPhilosophyofPsychologyandCognitiveScience,editedbyPaulThagarda¨PhilosophyofEconomics,editedbyUskaliMkiPhilosophyofAnthropologyandSociology,editedbyStephenTurnerandINTRODUCTIONTOTHEPHILOSOPHYOFPSYCHOLOGYANDCOGNITIVESCIENCEPaulThagardThisHandbookprovidesinformativeandinsightfultreatmentsofmanyofthekeycurrentissuesinthephilosophyofpsychologyandcognitivescienceThepurposeofmyintroductionistoprovideanoverviewofthisbranchofphilosophyofscienceBecauseIhopethehandbookwillbeusefulforscientistsandstudentsaswellasphilosophers,Ibeginwithelementaryexpositionsofthefieldsofpsychology,cognitivescience,andthephilosophyofscienceIthendescribethefundamentalepistemological,metaphysical,andethicalquestionsthatariseinthepracticeofscience,andsketchtheformstheytakeinpsychologyandtheothercognitivesciencesFinally,IpreviewthechaptersinthisHandbookPSYCHOLOGYANDCOGNITIVESCIENCEPsychology,theinvestigationofhumanmindandbehavior,goesbackatleasttoPlatoandAristotleHowever,itbecameanexperimentalscienceonlyaround,whenWilhelmWundtestablishedthefirstpsychologylaboratoryPhilosopherssuchasAristotle,Descartes,Locke,Hume,andKanthaddevelopedmanyinterestingconjecturesabouthowmindswork,butexperimentaltestsofpsychologicaltheoriesbeganonlyinthelatterpartofthenineteenthcenturyPsychologicaltheorizingwasgravelylimitedfromthestothesbythedominanceofbehaviorism,theviewthatscientificpsychologymustrestrictitselftothestudyofobservablebehaviorButsincethesscientificpsychologyhasbeencognitiveaswellasbehavioral,allowingforthepostulationandexperimentaltestingofmentalstructuresandprocessesthatarenotdirectlyobservableManytheoreticalideasinpsychologyoverthelastfiftyyearshaveoriginatedfromcomputerscience,becausethedevelopmentofdigitalcomputersinthesprovidedapowerfulwayofthinkingaboutmechanismsbywhichinformationcanbeprocessedPsychologyisnowpartofcognitivescience,theinterdisciplinarystudyofmindandintelligence,whichalsoembracesthefieldsofneuroscience,artificialintelligence,linguistics,anthropology,andphilosophyInthepastdecade,neurosciencehasmaderapidlyincreasingexperimentalandtheoreticalcontributionstopsychology,becauseoftheadventofbrainscanningtechniquesthatprovidewaysofobservingneuralprocessesPsychologyalsooverlapswithartificialintelligenceinthedevelopmentofcomputationalmodelsofthinking,andwithlinguisticsinthestudyofhowmindsunderstandandproducelanguageInaddition,psychologyoverlapswithanthropologyinthestudyofculturalaspectsofVolumeeditor:PaulThagardcHandbookofthePhilosophyofSciencePhilosophyofPsychologyandCognitiveScienceGeneraleditors:DovMGabbay,PaulThagardandJohnWoods©ElsevierBVAllrightsreservedxPaulThagardsocialcognition,andwithphilosophyinaconcernforfundamentalissuesaboutthenatureandexplanationofhumanmindsThephilosophyofscientificpsychologymustbedistinguishedfromenterprisesthathavebeenpopularinphilosophy:“philosophicalpsychology”andarmchairphilosophyofmindTheseenterprisesassumethatitispossibletolearnaboutthemindfromintrospection,ordinarylanguage,orthoughtexperimentsthatgenerateconceptualtruthsaboutwhatmindsmustbelikeIncontrast,psychologyislargelypracticedtodaybymeansofbehavioralandneuralexperimentsthatprovidedatausedtoevaluatetheoriesaboutunderlyingmentalstructuresandprocessesAttentiontointrospection,everydaylanguageandthoughtexperimentsmaybeusefulforgeneratinghypothesesaboutsuchstructuresandprocesses,buttheyareuselessforevaluatinghypothesesHenceIwanttosharplydistinguishphilosophyofpsychologyandcognitivesciencefromapproachestophilosophyofmindthatattempttoignorescientificdevelopmentsThepointofphilosophyofpsychologyisnottodevelopconceptualtruthsaboutminds,butrathertodealwithphilosophicalissuesthroughcloseattentiontodevelopmentsinscientificpsychologyandthealliedareasofcognitivescienceAlloftheessaysinthishandbooktakeascientificratherthananarmchairapproachtothephilosophyofpsychologyPHILOSOPHYANDSCIENCEPhilosophyistheinvestigationoffundamentalquestionsaboutthenatureofknowledge,reality,andmoralsAccordingtosomephilosophers,philosophyisinherentlydifferentfromscienceinthatitcanusepurereasoningtoacquireabsolutecertaintyinanswerstothesequestions,butnoonehasevermanagedtogenerateasetofanswersthatseemedunassailabletoanyonebuttheirgeneratorsTheviewofphilosophyIpreferisnaturalistic,seeingphilosophyandscienceasstronglyinterconnectedattemptstounderstandtheworld,includingtheoperationofhumanmindsNaturalismdoesnotproclaimthatphilosophyisreducibletoscience,becausephilosophicalquestionsaboutthenatureofknowledge,reality,andmoralsaremoregeneralandmorenormativethanquestionsthatareusuallyinvestigatedinempiricalsciencePhilosophicalquestionsaremoregeneralinthattheydonotconcerntheparticularkindsofentitiesandprocessesinvestigatedbyasciencesuchastheplantsandanimalsstudiedinbiologyrathertheyconcernthegeneralnatureofexistenceandourknowledgeofitMoreover,philosophicalquestionsdifferfromscientificonesinbeingnormativeaswellasdescriptive,concernedwithhowtheworldshouldbeaswellashowitisDespitetheirgeneralityandnormativity,philosophicalquestionsareintimatelyconnectedwithdescriptive,scientificonesTheconnectionsarebestseenbyconsideringthethreemainbranchesofphilosophy:epistemology,metaphysics,andethicsEpistemology,thetheoryofknowledge,askswhetherpeopleknowanything,whatweknow,andhowweknowitIthasoftenbeenpursuedinanapriorifashion,independentofanyordinaryorscientificexperience,butnoonehaseverestablishedanyaprioritruthsAmorenaturalisticapproachtoepistemologyIntroductionxiinvestigatesthestructureandgrowthofhumanknowledgebylocatingitinhumanmindsandsocietiesthatcaninpartbeinvestigatedbytheempiricalmethodsofpsychologyandtheothercognitivesciencesAlthoughsciencedoesnotdirectlyaddressthemostgeneralepistemologicalquestionsaboutwhetherweknowanythingatallandhowweoughttogoaboutacquiringknowledge,psychologydoesprovidemuchtheoreticalandexperimentalevidenceconcerningthementalstructureofwhatweknowandthementalprocessesbywhichknowledgeisacquired,rangingfromperceptiontohighlevelreasoningEpistemologythatisblindtohowmindsactuallyworkismisleadingandpointlessSimilarly,metaphysics,thetheoryofreality,isbestpursuedincloseconnectionwithscientificdevelopmentsMetaphysicalquestionsconcerntheexistenceandnatureofdifferentkindsofentities,forexamplegods,minds,concepts,materialobjects,andnumbersApriorireasoninghasbeenasfruitlessinmetaphysicsasithasbeeninepistemology,butnaturalisticphilosophythatalliesmetaphysicsandscienceprovidesamorepromisingwayofpursuingquestionsofexistenceForexample,thehypothesisthatGodexistscanbeevaluatedwithrespecttowhetheritaddsanythingtoexplanationsfromphysicsandbiologyabouttheoriginsandnatureoftheuniverseThenatureofhumanmindsandconceptscanbepursuedbyconsideringwhathasbeenlearnedabouttheseentitiesfromempiricalinvestigationsDeliberationsaboutthenatureofmaterialobjects,numbers,causation,andspaceandtimecanalsobeinformedbyscientifictheoriesaboutthenatureoftheuniverse,matter,andhumanmindsFormanyphilosophers,ethicshasseemedtobethebranchofphilosophymostimmunefromempiricalconsiderations,becauseitisconcernedwithhowpeopleoughttobehaveandnotwithhowtheydobehaveHowever,thepsychologyandneuroscienceofjudgmentcantellusalotaboutwhypeoplemaketheethicalevaluationsthattheydoandwhytheysometimesfallshortoftheirownethicalstandardsEthicsisindeednormativeratherthandescriptive,andisnotreducibletoorreplaceablebythecognitivesciencesButethicaltheoriesneedtobecoherentwiththemoralcapacitiesofhumanbeings,whichrequiresthattheypayattentiontomoralpsychologybasedonempiricalinvestigationsratherthanonaprioriconceptualconstructionsEpistemology,metaphysics,andethicsarehighlyconnectedwitheachotherViewsofthenatureofknowledgeinteractwithviewsofthenatureofreality:whatthereisaffectswhatcanbeknown,andwhatwethinkcanbeknownoftenaffectswhatwethinkexistsEpistemologyandethicsalsointeractindiscussionsofthenatureofethicalknowledgeFinally,ethicsandmetaphysicshaveimportantinterconnections,forexamplebetweenviewsaboutthenatureofmindsascapableorincapableoffreewillandviewsaboutholdingpeoplemorallyresponsiblefortheiractionsFromanaturalisticperspective,theintersectionsoftheseareasofphilosophyarealsointersectionswithareasofscienceForexample,moralepistemologyisintimatelytiedtoexperimentalandtheoreticalinvestigationsofmoralpsychologyxiiPaulThagardIfoneacceptsthiskindofnaturalisticapproachtometaphysics,epistemology,andethics,thenphilosophyofsciencebecomesofcentralimportancetophilosophyReflectionsonreality,knowledge,andmoralsmayfruitfullyintersectwithreflectionsonthedevelopmentofscientificunderstandingThefieldofphilosophyofsciencegoesbackatleasttoAristotleandFrancisBacon,butbecamerichlydevelopedonlyinthenineteenthcenturythroughthewritingsofWilliamWhewellandothersIthasflourishedbothwithgeneralstudiesofthemethodologyandresultsofscienceingeneralandwithspecificstudiesofindividualsciencesIwillnowdescribethecentralepistemological,metaphysical,andethicalissuesthatariseingeneralphilosophyofscience,andsketchtheparticularformsthattheytakeinthephilosophyofpsychologyandcognitivescienceEPISTEMOLOGICALISSUESThepremierepistemologicalissueinthephilosophyofsciencemightbetakentobewhetherscienceacquiresanyknowledgeatallHowever,whilephilosophersofscienceoftendebatethenatureofscientificknowledge,fewclaimthatitdoesnotexist,unlikesomesociologistswhoclaimthatscienceismerelyasocialconstructionSimilarly,fewphilosopherswithaseriousknowledgeofpsychologyandneurosciencewouldclaimthatthesefieldshavebeenutterfailuresintellingusanythingabouthowthemindworksSowhatisthestructureofscientificknowledgeOnonetraditionalview,scientificknowledgeconsistsofakindofpyramidwithexperimentaldataonthebottom,generalizationsaboutdatainthemiddle,andtheoriesabouttheunderlyingcausesofthedataatthetopThisviewindeedappliesroughlytopsychologyandneuroscience,whereresearchersdoperformexperimentsthatproduceobservableresultsthatarestatisticallysummarizedThesummariesareusuallycalled“effects”ratherthan“laws”,sinceuniversallawssuchasthosefoundinphysicsarerareinthecognitivesciencesTheoreticalcognitivesciencegoesbeyondsuchsummariestoproposetheoriesaboutthekindsofmentalrepresentationsandprocessesthatproducethevariousbehaviorsandbrainactivitiesobservedinexperimentsWhat’smissinginthisattractivepictureistheimportanceofmodelsthatprovideacrucialconnectionbetweenthetheoreticalpostulationofrepresentationsandprocessesandtheempiricalphenomenathattheyareintendedtoexplainAmodelisasimplifiedrepresentationoftheentitiesandtheirinteractionshypothesizedbyatheoryInpsychologyandneuroscience,modelsareusuallycomputational,inkeepingwiththeplausiblecontentionthatwhatbrainsdoisakindofcomputationComputerprogramshavedatastructuresandalgorithmsthatcanbetakentocorrespondtothementalorneuralrepresentationsandprocessesthatoperateinthemindRunningtheprogramsprovidesawayofdeterminingwhetherthetheoriesthatpostulatestructuresandprocessescaneffectivelyproducethekindsofbehaviorsobservedinexperimentsHencethestructureofknowledgeincognitivescienceconsistsofacomplexofexperimentalreports,effects,models,andtheoriesIntroductionxiiiThisaccountofthestructureofscientificknowledgeshouldmeshwithadynamicdescriptionofthescientificmethodsthatproducethestructureManyfamiliarpicturesofscientificmethodaremuchtoosimpleAccordingtotheinductivistpicture,scienceproceedsbycollectingobservationsandthengeneralizingthemintolawsSuchactivitydoestakeplaceinpsychologyandneurosciencewhenresearchersattempttounderstandtheirdata,buttheiraimisnotusuallyjusttocollectsomedataandgeneralizeaboutthemRather,experimentsareoftendonewiththemotivationoftestingsometheoreticalclaimsaboutwhatmightproducementalbehaviorThismotivationfitsbetterwiththehypotheticodeductivistpicture,accordingtowhichscientistsformhypothesesandthensetouttotestthemHowever,thispictureoversimplifiestherelationbetweentheoryandexperiment,becausewhatoftenhappensisthatscientistshavetheoriesthatsuggestexperimentsthatprovidedatathatsuggestnewtheoriesThusscientificmethodproceedsneitherfromdatatolaws,norfromtheoriestoexperiments,butratherconsistsofacomplexinterconnectedfeedbackprocessoftheorizing,experimentation,andreasoningOneofthemostimportantissuesintheepistemologyofscienceistheoryevaluation:howdoscientistsdecidewhetherproposedtheoriesshouldbeacceptedorrejectedAccordingtoinductivists,thequestionneverarises,becausescientificinferenceisonlytogeneralizationsofwhatisobservedratherthantotheoriesaboutunderlyingentitiesthatareunobservableMoreplausibleisthehypotheticdeductivepicturethatsaysthatatheoryisusedtomakepredictionsthatcaneitherconfirmorrefuteitHowever,eveninmathematicallyrichfieldslikephysics,deductiverelationsareneverenoughtoproducetherefutationofatheory,becausethefailureofpredictionscanalwaysbeattributedtootherfactorssuchasflawsinexperimentaldesignRefutationisevenmoredifficultinstatisticalsciencessuchaspsychology,becausetheexperimentalresultsdonotfollowdeductivelyfromtheoriesRather,theoriessuggestmodelsthatsuggestexperimentsthatproducestatisticaleffects,whichareneverdefinitiveenoughtostrictlyfalsifyatheoryThisflexibilitydoesnotmeanthatonepsychologicaltheoryisasgoodasanother,becausecompetingtheoriescanbeevaluatedaccordingtohowwelltheyprovideexplanationsofabroadrangeofexperimentalresultsSuchcompetitionsareafrequentandvaluablepartofdiscourseinthecognitivesciences,concerningthebestexplanationofsuchimportantphenomenaaslanguagelearningandmentalimageryMuchworkinthephilosophyofpsychologyandcognitivesciencehasbeenaddressedtocharacterizingandassessingmajortheoreticalcontroversiesIhavedescribedtherelationbetweentheoriesandexperimentalresultsasexplanation,whichpresupposesanunderstandingofthenatureofexplanationsThistopicisacentralandcontroversialoneinthephilosophyofscience,whichhasprominentadvocatesofseveraldifferentaccountsExplanationhasvariouslybeenconstruedasadeductiverelationbetweensentences,aprobabilisticrelationbetweensentences,arelationoffitbetweenschemasandrepresentationsofdata,andanontologicalrelationbetweenmechanismsandthephenomenatheyproduceMyownviewisthatexplanationsinpsychologyandcognitivesciencearexivPaulThagardmechanistic,inthattheoriespostulateentitiessuchasmentalrepresentationsandneuralstructuresthataresupposedtoproduceobservablebeh

用户评价(0)

关闭

新课改视野下建构高中语文教学实验成果报告(32KB)

抱歉,积分不足下载失败,请稍后再试!

提示

试读已结束,如需要继续阅读或者下载,敬请购买!

评分:

/49

VIP

在线
客服

免费
邮箱

爱问共享资料服务号

扫描关注领取更多福利