Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T11:32:17.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Souls for Old

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2013

Anne Jaap Jacobson
Anne Jaap Jacobson*
Affiliation:
Center for Neuro-Engineering and Cognitive Science, University of Houston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

John Hibbing's paper prompts me to outline three points: (1) Cognitive psychology and neuroscience are developing a new picture of human beings' cognitive functioning, broadly understood. One startling implication is that we often understand ourselves much less well than we are inclined to think. (2) It is seriously mistaken to think that reading the output of an fMRI experiment is as easy and clear as interpreting a realistic picture. Among other things, various interpretations of an output may be equally acceptable. (3) Neuroscience can, and has been, used to support widespread prejudices, such as the intellectual inferiority of the female mind. Major researchers have given in to the temptation to see their older views in the new sciences of the mind. The second and third points may well lead us to think that incorporating the insights from the new fields involves us in genuinely interdisciplinary research. At the very least, we cannot count on skimming through an admired text to find out what is right. But serious research that spans different disciplines can be immensely rewarding.

Type
Reflection Response
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , June 2013 , pp. 516 - 519
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bluhm, R., Jacobson, A.J., and Maibom, H.L.. 2012. Neurofeminism: Issues at the Intersection of Feminist Theory and Cognitive Science. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Carey, B. 2012. “Academic ‘Dream Team’ Helped Obama's Effort. New York Times, D1, November 13.Google Scholar
Chabris, C.F., and Simons, D.J.. 2010. The Invisible Gorilla: Thinking Clearly in a World of Illusions. New York: Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
Damasio, A.R. 2005. Descartes' Error: Eemotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Farah, Martha J. 2007. “This Is Your Brain on Politics?” Neuroethics & Law Blog. http://kolber.typepad.com/ethics_law_blog/2007/11/this-is-your-br.html (accessed February 5, 2013).Google Scholar
Fine, C. 2005. A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives. Crows Nest, NSW.: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Fine, C. 2010. Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. 2002. “Maps of Bounded Rationality.” Retrieved from http://nobelprize.org/economics/laureates/2002/kahnemann-lecture.pdfGoogle Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. W. 2000. “Situating Vision in the World.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4(5): 197–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Volz, K.G., Schubotz, R.I., and von Cramon, D.Y.. 2005. “Variants of Uncertainty in Decision-Making and Their Neural Correlates.” Brain Research Bulletin 67(5): 403–12.Google Scholar