The Neuroscience of Human Morality: Three Levels of Normative Implications

The Neuroscience of Human Morality: Three Levels of Normative Implications
复制标题

人类道德的神经科学:三个层面的规范含义

DOI:
10.1007/978-3-030-56134-5_1
复制
发表时间:
2020
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Leefmann
Leefmann
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
Leefmann

文献摘要

参考文献

相似文献

关于自然科学和社会科学中的实证研究对规范性学科的影响的争论最近得到了新的关注。随着神经科学对人类心理活动、决策和能动性的研究范围不断扩大,神经伦理学家和神经科学家广泛主张,神经科学研究的结果应该被视为规范性的,甚至是规定性的。在本章中,我将研究这些主张可能意味着什么。我区分并讨论了神经科学证据具有规范性含义这一论题的三种解读:行动论解读、认识论解读和形而上学阅读。我的结论是,行动理论的阅读具有最直接的规范性后果,即使它是有限的问题,一些预先建立的道德规范是否可以实现的个人代理。相反,在应用其他两种解读时,神经科学只能说以非常间接的方式具有规范性含义,而且只有在做出有争议的元伦理假设的条件下。总而言之,从神经科学证据中推断出具体的规范性判断的空间相对有限。
Debates about the implications of empirical research in the natural and social sciences for normative disciplines have recently gained new attention. With the widening scope of neuroscientific investigations into human mental activity, decision-making and agency, neuroethicists and neuroscientists have extensively claimed that results from neuroscientific research should be taken as normatively or even prescriptively relevant. In this chapter, I investigate what these claims could possibly amount to. I distinguish and discuss three readings of the thesis that neuroscientific evidence has normative implications: an action-theoretic, an epistemological, and a metaphysical reading. I conclude that the action-theoretic reading has the most direct normative consequences, even though it is limited to the questions of whether some pre-established moral norms can be realized by individual agents. In contrast, in applying the other two readings, neuroscience can only be said to have normative implications in a very indirect way and only under the condition of making contested metaethical assumptions. All in all, the room for inferring concrete normative judgments from neuroscientific evidence is relatively limited.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01398.x
发表时间: 2010-09-01
期刊: MIND & LANGUAGE
影响因子: 2
作者:
Beebe, James R.;Buckwalter, Wesley
通讯作者: Buckwalter, Wesley
DOI: --
发表时间: 2002-09
期刊: --
影响因子: --
作者:
Timothy D. Wilson
通讯作者: Timothy D. Wilson
近代哲学的主要趋势:经验主义的两个教条。
DOI: --
发表时间: 1951
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
W. Quine
通讯作者: W. Quine
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1210467109
发表时间: 2012-10-16
影响因子: 11.1
作者:
Schurger, Aaron;Sitt, Jacobo D.;Dehaene, Stanislas
通讯作者: Dehaene, Stanislas
DOI: 10.1196/annals.1440.005
发表时间: 2008-01-01
期刊: YEAR IN COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE 2008
影响因子: --
作者:
Moll, Jorge;de Oliveira-Souza, Ricardo;Zahn, Roland
通讯作者: Zahn, Roland