Could the neural ABC explain the mind?

Area of Science:

• Philosophy of Mind
• Neuroscience
• Metaphysics

Background:

• The radical neuron doctrine posits a strict link between neural states and mental states.
• Gold & Stoljar critique this doctrine but their distinction between determination and explanation is debated.

Purpose of the Study:

• To offer a more principled distinction between determination and explanation in the context of antireductionism.
• To provide a more precise construal of the dissociation between explanation and determination.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of determination and explanation.
• Application of notions of multiple supervenience and screening-off.
• Critique of Gold & Stoljar's distinction.

Main Results:

• The distinction between determination and explanation proposed by Gold & Stoljar is not sufficiently principled.
• Multiple supervenience and screening-off provide a more robust framework for understanding this dissociation.
• This framework supports the antireductionist position more effectively.

Conclusions:

• The radical neuron doctrine should be rejected.
• A more precise understanding of the relationship between neural and mental states requires concepts like multiple supervenience and screening-off.
• These concepts offer a stronger foundation for antireductionist arguments in philosophy of mind.