Dissociations in Neuropsychology and Cognitive Neuroscience.

In this article, I compare the epistemic standing of the function-to-structure inferences found in cognitive neuroscience and of the inferences based on dissociations in neuropsychology. I argue that the former have a poorer epistemic standing than the latter.

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Philosophy of Science Vol. 79; no. 4; pp. 490 - 519
Autor principal: Machery, Edouard
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Cambridge University Press Oct2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=82581724&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 82581724
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318248
        PSC
      jtl: Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00318248
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2012
      vid: 79
      iid: 4
      pid: 15979
      pub: Cambridge University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        82581724
        10.1086/668002
      ppf: 490
      ppct: 29
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 1.3MB
      tig:
        atl: Dissociations in Neuropsychology and Cognitive Neuroscience.
      aug:
        au: Machery, Edouard
        affil: Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, 1017CL, Pittsburgh, PA 15260
      su:
        Neuropsychology
        Cognitive neuroscience
        Cognitive interference
        Philosophy of science
        Philosophy
      sug:
        subj:
          Neuropsychology
          Cognitive neuroscience
          Cognitive interference
          Philosophy of science
          Philosophy
      ab: In this article, I compare the epistemic standing of the function-to-structure inferences found in cognitive neuroscience and of the inferences based on dissociations in neuropsychology. I argue that the former have a poorer epistemic standing than the latter.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Philosophy of Science
      holder: Cambridge University Press
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2012
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N