History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Fallacies of neuroscience as foundation for ethics

June 21st, 2011 · 6 Comments

For people familiar with Churchland’s work over the past four decades, her desire to bring the brain into the discussion will come as no surprise: She has long made the case that philosophers must take account of neuroscience in their investigations.

Why neuroscience? The implicit ‘rationality’ of the ethical (with a larger framework perhaps than the rational), as in the view of Kant, requires no discussion of the brain.
Why is neuroscience given the top billing here all of a sudden? It makes no sense.

Tags: General

6 responses so far ↓

Leave a Comment