The neuroscientific study of free will: A diagnosis of the controversy
Benjamin Libet's work paved the way for the neuroscientific study of free will. Other scientists have praised this research as groundbreaking. In philosophy, the reception has been more negative, often even dismissive. First, I will propose a diagnosis of this striking discrepancy. I will sugge...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Synthese (Dordrecht) 2014-01, Vol.191 (2), p.245-262 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 262 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 245 |
| container_title | Synthese (Dordrecht) |
| container_volume | 191 |
| creator | Schlosser, Markus E. |
| description | Benjamin Libet's work paved the way for the neuroscientific study of free will. Other scientists have praised this research as groundbreaking. In philosophy, the reception has been more negative, often even dismissive. First, I will propose a diagnosis of this striking discrepancy. I will suggest that the experiments seem irrelevant, from the perspective of philosophy, due to the way in which they operationalize free will. In particular, I will argue that this operational definition does not capture free will properly and that it is based on a false dichotomy between internal and external causes. However, I will also suggest that this problem could be overcome, as there are no obvious obstacles to an operationalization of free will that is in accord with the philosophical conception of free will. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11229-013-0312-2 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1492445797</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24019927</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24019927</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c381t-917477e89e8ce4b821bc8dedf978ad8b7d6fc7d9f3cc2fed49c48638f71c077f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwIOw4Hk1k6Q7ibdSrAoFL_UctvlTt9RNTXaVfvumrIgnT8Mw7_ce8wi5BnoHlOJ9AmBMlRR4STmwkp2QEUwwb6oSp2REKVclygmek4uUNpQCVIKOyHz57orW9TEk07i2a3xjitT1dl8EX_joXPHdbLcPxbSwTb1uQ2rS8dJlzIS2i-HLxbS_JGe-3iZ39TPH5G3-uJw9l4vXp5fZdFEaLqErFaBAdFI5aZxYSQYrI62zXqGsrVyhrbxBqzw3hnlnhTJCVlx6BEMRPR-T28F3F8Nn71KnN6GPbY7UIBQTYoIKswoGlclvpei83sXmo457DVQf69JDXTrXpY91aZYZNjApa9u1i3-c_4FuBmiTuhB_U5igoBRDfgB80Hbl</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1492445797</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The neuroscientific study of free will: A diagnosis of the controversy</title><source>Springer Online Journals Complete</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Schlosser, Markus E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schlosser, Markus E.</creatorcontrib><description>Benjamin Libet's work paved the way for the neuroscientific study of free will. Other scientists have praised this research as groundbreaking. In philosophy, the reception has been more negative, often even dismissive. First, I will propose a diagnosis of this striking discrepancy. I will suggest that the experiments seem irrelevant, from the perspective of philosophy, due to the way in which they operationalize free will. In particular, I will argue that this operational definition does not capture free will properly and that it is based on a false dichotomy between internal and external causes. However, I will also suggest that this problem could be overcome, as there are no obvious obstacles to an operationalization of free will that is in accord with the philosophical conception of free will.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-7857</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0964</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11229-013-0312-2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Ambivalence ; Consciousness ; Desire ; Determinism ; Education ; Empirical evidence ; Empiricism ; Epiphenomenalism ; Epistemology ; Free will ; Freedom of choice ; Logic ; Metaphysics ; Neurophilosophy ; Neurosciences ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Language ; Philosophy of Science ; Unconscious mind</subject><ispartof>Synthese (Dordrecht), 2014-01, Vol.191 (2), p.245-262</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media 2014</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c381t-917477e89e8ce4b821bc8dedf978ad8b7d6fc7d9f3cc2fed49c48638f71c077f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c381t-917477e89e8ce4b821bc8dedf978ad8b7d6fc7d9f3cc2fed49c48638f71c077f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24019927$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24019927$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318,58016,58249</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schlosser, Markus E.</creatorcontrib><title>The neuroscientific study of free will: A diagnosis of the controversy</title><title>Synthese (Dordrecht)</title><addtitle>Synthese</addtitle><description>Benjamin Libet's work paved the way for the neuroscientific study of free will. Other scientists have praised this research as groundbreaking. In philosophy, the reception has been more negative, often even dismissive. First, I will propose a diagnosis of this striking discrepancy. I will suggest that the experiments seem irrelevant, from the perspective of philosophy, due to the way in which they operationalize free will. In particular, I will argue that this operational definition does not capture free will properly and that it is based on a false dichotomy between internal and external causes. However, I will also suggest that this problem could be overcome, as there are no obvious obstacles to an operationalization of free will that is in accord with the philosophical conception of free will.</description><subject>Ambivalence</subject><subject>Consciousness</subject><subject>Desire</subject><subject>Determinism</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Empirical evidence</subject><subject>Empiricism</subject><subject>Epiphenomenalism</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Free will</subject><subject>Freedom of choice</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Neurophilosophy</subject><subject>Neurosciences</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Language</subject><subject>Philosophy of Science</subject><subject>Unconscious mind</subject><issn>0039-7857</issn><issn>1573-0964</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwIOw4Hk1k6Q7ibdSrAoFL_UctvlTt9RNTXaVfvumrIgnT8Mw7_ce8wi5BnoHlOJ9AmBMlRR4STmwkp2QEUwwb6oSp2REKVclygmek4uUNpQCVIKOyHz57orW9TEk07i2a3xjitT1dl8EX_joXPHdbLcPxbSwTb1uQ2rS8dJlzIS2i-HLxbS_JGe-3iZ39TPH5G3-uJw9l4vXp5fZdFEaLqErFaBAdFI5aZxYSQYrI62zXqGsrVyhrbxBqzw3hnlnhTJCVlx6BEMRPR-T28F3F8Nn71KnN6GPbY7UIBQTYoIKswoGlclvpei83sXmo457DVQf69JDXTrXpY91aZYZNjApa9u1i3-c_4FuBmiTuhB_U5igoBRDfgB80Hbl</recordid><startdate>20140101</startdate><enddate>20140101</enddate><creator>Schlosser, Markus E.</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GB0</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140101</creationdate><title>The neuroscientific study of free will: A diagnosis of the controversy</title><author>Schlosser, Markus E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c381t-917477e89e8ce4b821bc8dedf978ad8b7d6fc7d9f3cc2fed49c48638f71c077f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Ambivalence</topic><topic>Consciousness</topic><topic>Desire</topic><topic>Determinism</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Empirical evidence</topic><topic>Empiricism</topic><topic>Epiphenomenalism</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Free will</topic><topic>Freedom of choice</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Neurophilosophy</topic><topic>Neurosciences</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Language</topic><topic>Philosophy of Science</topic><topic>Unconscious mind</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schlosser, Markus E.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>DELNET Social Sciences & Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schlosser, Markus E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The neuroscientific study of free will: A diagnosis of the controversy</atitle><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle><stitle>Synthese</stitle><date>2014-01-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>191</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>245</spage><epage>262</epage><pages>245-262</pages><issn>0039-7857</issn><eissn>1573-0964</eissn><abstract>Benjamin Libet's work paved the way for the neuroscientific study of free will. Other scientists have praised this research as groundbreaking. In philosophy, the reception has been more negative, often even dismissive. First, I will propose a diagnosis of this striking discrepancy. I will suggest that the experiments seem irrelevant, from the perspective of philosophy, due to the way in which they operationalize free will. In particular, I will argue that this operational definition does not capture free will properly and that it is based on a false dichotomy between internal and external causes. However, I will also suggest that this problem could be overcome, as there are no obvious obstacles to an operationalization of free will that is in accord with the philosophical conception of free will.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s11229-013-0312-2</doi><tpages>18</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0039-7857 |
| ispartof | Synthese (Dordrecht), 2014-01, Vol.191 (2), p.245-262 |
| issn | 0039-7857 1573-0964 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1492445797 |
| source | Springer Online Journals Complete; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
| subjects | Ambivalence Consciousness Desire Determinism Education Empirical evidence Empiricism Epiphenomenalism Epistemology Free will Freedom of choice Logic Metaphysics Neurophilosophy Neurosciences Philosophy Philosophy of Language Philosophy of Science Unconscious mind |
| title | The neuroscientific study of free will: A diagnosis of the controversy |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T01%3A35%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20neuroscientific%20study%20of%20free%20will:%20A%20diagnosis%20of%20the%20controversy&rft.jtitle=Synthese%20(Dordrecht)&rft.au=Schlosser,%20Markus%20E.&rft.date=2014-01-01&rft.volume=191&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=245&rft.epage=262&rft.pages=245-262&rft.issn=0039-7857&rft.eissn=1573-0964&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11229-013-0312-2&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E24019927%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1492445797&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24019927&rfr_iscdi=true |