Against Strong Reductivism in Neuroscience Education: A Three-pronged Argument

• Authors: Johnston James Scott

Title variants

PL

Przeciw redukcjonizmowi w kształceniu neurobiologicznym. Potrójny argument

• Languages of publication: EN PL

Abstracts

EN

It is becoming increasingly clear that the neurosciences play a significant role in educational research, theory and practice. Neuroscientific researchers working in education have, for the most part, avoided strongly reductivist positions (eliminative materialism, reducibility of mental states to neural states). But there are those that do claim a single vocabulary—a neurophysiological vocabulary—will ultimately replace the current cognitive-scientific (functionalist) one. This paper argues against this happening through a three-pronged argument demonstrating the irreducibility of cognitive science (mental states) to neural states. Along the way, this paper discusses certain research findings in neuroscience education, and the controversies these have generated.

PL

Staje się coraz bardziej jasne, że neurobiologia odgrywa znaczącą rolę w badaniach edukacyjnych, jak i w edukacyjnej teorii i praktyce. Neurobiolodzy pracujący na polu edukacji w większości nie zajmują pozycji silnie redukcjonistycznych (materializm eliminacyjny, sprowadzanie procesów umysłowych do poziomu zmian neuronalnych). Są jednak i tacy, którzy twierdzą, że tylko jeden rodzaj słownictwa – słownictwo neurofizjologiczne – ostatecznie zastąpi obecne słownictwo kognitywne (funkcjonalistyczne). W powyższym artykule opowiadam się przeciwko takiemu stanowisku, demonstrując trojaką argumentację, wykazującą nieredukowalność nauk o umyśle (procesów umysłowych) do procesów neuronalnych. Poza tym omawiam również niektóre odkrycia w sferze kształcenia neurobiologicznego oraz wynikające z niego kontrowersje.

Keywords

EN

neuroscience education; neurophilosophy; strong reductivism; eliminative materialism; pragmatism

PL

kształcenie neurobiologiczne; neurofilozofia; skrajny redukcjonizm; materializm eliminacyjny; pragmatyzm

• Publisher: Akademia Ignatianum w Krakowie
• Journal: Studia Paedagogica Ignatiana
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 18
• Pages: 177-202

Dates

published

2015

Contributors

author

Johnston James Scott

• Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada

References

• Baars B., Gage N., Cognition, Brain, and Consciousness, 2nd edition, Elsevier, Burlington, MA 2010.
• Bennett M., Hacker P., Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience, Blackwell, London 2003.
• Bennett M., Hacker P., “Selections from Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience”, in: Neuroscience and Philosophy: Brain, Mind, and Language, ed. M. Bennett, P. Hacker, Columbia University Press, New York 2007, pp. 3–48.
• Breuer J.T., “Education and the Brain: A Bridge Too Far”, Educational Researcher 1997, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 4–16.
• Chalmers D., “How Can We Construct a Science of Consciousness?”, in: The Cognitive Neurosciences III, ed. M.S. Gazzaniga, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2004, pp. 111–119.
• Churchland P., Matter and Consciousness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA 1984.
• Churchland P., Neurophilosophy: Towards a Unified Science of Mind-Brain, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 1986.
• Churchland P., “Reduction, Qualia, and the Direct Introspection of Brain States”, in: Materialism and the Mind-Body Problem, ed. D.M. Rosenthal, Hackett, Indianapolis 2000, pp. 260–278.
• Churchland P., “Functionalism at Forty: a Critical Retrospective”, in: Neurophilosophy at Work, ed. P. Churchland, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2007, pp. 18–36.
• Churchland P., “Neurosemantics: On the Mapping of Minds and the Portrayal of Worlds”, in: Neuro­philosophy at Work, ed. P. Churchland, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2007, pp. 129–162.
• Churchland P., “Braintrust”, Vancouver Sun 2012, February 4. Available at: <http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2012/02/04/pat-churchland-fights-for-supremacy-of-the-brain>.
• Dekker S., Lee N.C., Howard-Jones P., Jolies J., “Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among Teachers”, Frontiers in Psychology 2012, no. 3(429), Available at: <http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429/full>.
• Delazer M., Domahs F., Bartha L., Brennis C., Lochy A., Trieb T., Benke T., “Learning Complex Arithmetic—an fMRI Study”, Cognitive Brain Research 2003, vol. 18, pp. 76–88.
• Delazer M., Ishebeck A., Domahs F., Zamarian L., Koppelstaetter F., Siedentopf C., Kaufmann M., Benke L., Felber T.S., “Learning by Strategies and Learning by Drill—Evidence from an fMRI Study”, Neuroimage 2005, vol. 25, pp. 838–849.
• Dennett D., Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 1978.
• Dennett D., Consciousness Explained, Little, Brown, and Co, Boston 1991.
• Dewey J., “The Reflex-Arc Concept in Psychology”, in: The Early Works of John Dewey, vol. 5, ed. J.A. Boydston, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale 1972, pp. 96–108.
• Dewey J., “Experience and Nature”, in: The Early Works of John Dewey, vol. 1, ed. J.A. Boydston, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale 1981.
• Fischer K., “Mind, Brain, and Education: Building a Scientific Groundwork for Learning and Teaching”, Mind, Brain, and Education 2009, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 3–16.
• Fodor J., Psychological Explanation, Random House, New York 1968.
• Fodor J., “Materialism”, in: Materialism and the Mind-Body Problem, ed. D.M. Rosenthal, Indianapolis 2000, pp. 128–149.
• Geake J., “Neuromythologies in Education”, Educational Researcher 2014, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 123–133.
• Goswami U., “Neuroscience and Education”, British Journal of Educational Psychology 2004, vol. 74, pp. 1–14.
• Goswami U., “Neuroscience and Education: From Research to Practice?”, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2006, vol. 7, pp. 406–413.
• Goswami U., Cognitive Development. The Learning Brain, Psychology Press, Hove & New York 2008.
• Gusnard D., Raichle M., “Functional Imaging and the Resting Brain”, in: The Cognitive Neurosciences III, ed. M. Gazzaniga, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2004, pp. 1267–1280.
• Howard-Jones P., “Philosophical Challenges for Researchers at the Interface between Neuroscience and Education”, Journal of Philosophy of Education 2008, vol. 42, no. 3–4, pp. 361–380.
• Howard-Jones P., “Neuroscience and Education: Myths and Messages”, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2014, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 817–824.
• Jackson F., “Epiphenomenal Qualia”, The Philosophical Quarterly 1982, vol. 32, pp. 127–136.
• James W., Principles of Psychology, vol. 1, Dover Press, New York 1918.
• Lindstrom M., “You Love Your I-Phone. Literally”, New York Times, October 1, 2011. Available at: <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/01/opinion/you-love-your-iphone-literally.html>.
• Mead G.H., Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1934.
• Mitchell R., “Brainstorm”, Toronto Star 2009, October 31-November 7, Available at: <http://www.thestar.com/topic/Atkinson2009>.
• Nyberg L., Eriksson J., Larsson A., Marklund P., “Learning by Doing versus Learning by Thinking: An fMRI Study of Motor and Mental Training”, Neuropsychologia 2006, vol. 44, pp. 711–717.
• Poldrack R., “Can Cognitive Processes be Inferred from Neuroimaging Data?”, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2006, vol. 10, no 2, pp. 59–63.
• Pickering S., Howard-Jones P., “Educators’ Views on the Role of Neuroscience in Education: Findings From a Study of UK and International Perspectives”, Mind, Brain, and Education 2009, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 109–113.
• Poser M., Rothbart M., “Influencing Brain Networks: Implications for Education”, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2005, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 99–103.
• Preuss T., “What is it Like to Be a Human?”, in: The Cognitive Neurosciences III, ed. M. Gazzaniga, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2004, pp. 3–12.
• Purdy N., Morrison H., “Cognitive Neuroscience and Education: Unraveling the Confusion”, Oxford Review of Education 2009, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 99–109.
• Putnam H., „The Nature of Mental States”, in: idem, Philosophical Papers, vol. 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1975, pp. 429–440.
• Quine V.W.O., Word and Object, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1960.
• Rizzolatti G., Craighero L., “The Mirror-Neuron System”, Annual Review of Neuroscience 2004, vol. 27, pp. 169–192.
• Rorty R., “In Defense of Eliminative Materialism”, Review of Metaphysics 1970, vol. 24, pp. 112–121.
• Scott J., Curran C., “Brains in Jars: The Problem of Language in Neuroscientific Research”, Mind, Brain, and Education 2010, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 149–155.
• Smart J.J.C., “Sensations and Brain Processes”, Philosophical Review 1959, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 141–156.
• Tallis R., “What Neuroscience Cannot Tell Us About Ourselves”, The New Atlantis 2010, 29 (Fall), pp. 3–25.
• Thagard P., Mind: an Introduction to Cognitive Psychology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2005.
• Tommerdahl J., “A Model for Bridging the Gap between Neuroscience and Education”, Oxford Review of Education 2010, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 97–109.
• Turkeltaub P.E., Gareau L., Flowers D.L., Zeffiro T.A., Eden G.F., “Development of Neural Mechanisms for Reading”, Nature Neuroscience 2003, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 767–773.
• Van Horn J.D., “Cognitive Neuroimaging: History, Developments, and Directions”, in: The Cognitive Neurosciences III, ed. M. Gazzaniga, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 2004, pp. 1281–1294.
• Varma S., McCandliss B., Schwartz D., “Scientific and Pragmatic Challenges for Bridging Education and Neuroscience”, Educational Researcher 2008, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 140–152.
• Whitehead A.N., An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Natural Knowledge, 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1925.

Identifiers

ISSN

2450-5358

DOI

10.12775/SPI.2015.009