Conclusion: Coexistence and Collaboration Between Cognitive Neuroscience and Philosophy

Abstract

Cognitive neuroscience (CNS) and philosophy address very different questions. Cognitive neuroscientists study questions pertaining to the brain-in-action: empirical questions regarding the neural underpinnings of human behavior and experience. Philosophers study questions that mostly cannot be addressed empirically: conceptual questions for example, and normative ones, all pertaining to lived experience, rather than to its enabling conditions. It therefore does not make sense to think of philosophy as an imprecise, speculative forerunner of cognitive neuroscience, nor to think of cognitive neuroscience as a coarse type of pseudo-philosophy. The two disciplines have different aims and can co-exist just fine.

What is more, they can collaborate. Parts of philosophy do in fact rely on assumptions about the enabling conditions to human behavior and experience, and these parts may be informed by CNS. Vice versa, CNS’ research process relies on interpretation during task development and interpretation of results and would benefit from philosophy’s systematic way of dealing with interpretation.

As the influence of cognitive neuroscience on other fields (from policy making to parenting advice) is still growing, this book can provide a realistic view on contributions to self-understanding we can and cannot expect from CNS.