Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-667
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKohler, Axel
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-26T08:24:44Z
dc.date.available2016-10-26T10:24:44Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.urihttps://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/669-
dc.description.abstractWhen neuroscientists explain the biological basis of a phenomenon of interest, they usually try to identify the parts of a system that seem do the relevant job, and propose a model of how those parts interact to produce the phenomenon. This mechanistic framework of explanation is widely used and has been investigated from a philosophical point of view by different authors. In his target article, Michael Anderson poses a challenge to the currently dominant version of mechanistic explanation as advocated, e.g., by Carl Craver. Taking empirical results and explanatory models from studies on retinal starburst amacrine cells as a starting point, Anderson suggests that the current framework for mechanistic explanation should be extended to include a differentiation between systems and mechanisms, which would allow more leeway in understanding processing in the nervous system. Mechanisms can then be seen to provide enabling constraints on the functioning of systems, where the mechanisms do not need to be subsumed under the system and do not even have to be on the same organizational level. Although Anderson’s proposal is interesting and worth exploring, I am unconvinced that this extension conforms to real-world explanatory practice and/or is necessary for accommodating the understanding of direction-selectivity in the retina. I examine another sample of research on starburst amacrine cells, where the integration of empirical data and computational models shows that, on close inspection, it is distributed networks to which certain characteristics are ascribed —a situation that can be handled with the available tools of mechanistic explanation.en_GB
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsInCopyrightde_DE
dc.rights.urihttps://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subject.ddc100 Philosophiede_DE
dc.subject.ddc100 Philosophyen_GB
dc.titleCarving the brain at its joints : a commentary on Michael L. Andersonen_GB
dc.typeBuchbeitragde_DE
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:hebis:77-publ-550292
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-667-
jgu.type.dinitypebookPart
jgu.type.versionPublished versionen_GB
jgu.type.resourceText
jgu.organisation.departmentFB 05 Philosophie und Philologie-
jgu.organisation.number7920-
jgu.organisation.nameJohannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz-
jgu.rights.accessrightsopenAccess-
jgu.book.titleOpen MIND
jgu.book.editorMetzinger, Thomas
jgu.pages.alternativeKap. 1(C)
jgu.publisher.year2015
jgu.publisher.nameMIND Group
jgu.publisher.placeFrankfurt am Main
jgu.publisher.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.15502/9783958570627
jgu.organisation.placeMainz-
jgu.subject.ddccode100
opus.date.accessioned2016-10-26T08:24:44Z
opus.date.modified2016-10-31T11:31:02Z
opus.date.available2016-10-26T10:24:44
opus.subject.dfgcode02-110
opus.organisation.stringFB 05: Philosophie und Philologie: Philosophisches Seminarde_DE
opus.identifier.opusid55029
opus.relation.ispartofcollectionOpen Mindde_DE
opus.institute.number0508
opus.metadataonlyfalse
opus.type.contenttypeKeinede_DE
opus.type.contenttypeNoneen_GB
jgu.publisher.doi10.15502/9783958570627
jgu.organisation.rorhttps://ror.org/023b0x485
Appears in collections:JGU-Publikationen

Files in This Item:
  File Description SizeFormat
Thumbnail
55029.pdf285.19 kBAdobe PDFView/Open