Neurociencia y la personaHacia una circularidad positiva entre la Neurociencia y las Humanidades

  1. JAVIER BERNÁCER 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Navarra
    info

    Universidad de Navarra

    Pamplona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02rxc7m23

Revista:
Almogaren: revista del Centro Teológico de Las Palmas

ISSN: 1695-2669

Año de publicación: 2019

Título del ejemplar: XIII Jornadas de Teología 2019

Número: 64

Páginas: 51-81

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Almogaren: revista del Centro Teológico de Las Palmas

Resumen

La neurociencia ha asumido el reto de enfrentarse a la comprensión del órgano más complejo de la naturaleza: el cerebro humano. En los últimos años son muchos los que piensan que será ella quien nos permita escapar de nuestro gran enemigo: la muerte. De ahí que puede dejarse llevar por una circularidad negativa y aspirar a responder desde ella misma a las grandes preguntas del ser humano, una de las cuales es qué significa ser persona. El autor hace un breve repaso del concepto de persona a lo largo de la filosofía, y propone el esqueleto para construir una circularidad positiva entre la neurociencia y las humanidades, planteando qué neurociencia es necesaria para llegar a comprender la persona. A su juicio, es el diálogo interdisciplinar el camino adecuado para dicha circularidad positiva, especialmente en preguntas tan ambiciosas como qué es ser persona.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Amengual Coll, Gabriel. 2015. La Persona Humana. El Debate Sobre Su Concepto. Madrid: Síntesis.
  • Anderson, Michael L. 2003. “Embodied Cognition: A Field Guide”. Artificial Intelligence 149 (1): 91–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(03)00054-7.
  • Bernácer, J., and J.M. Giménez-Amaya. 2013. On Habit Learning in Neuroscience and Free Will. Is Science Compatible with Free Will?: Exploring Free Will and Consciousness in the Light of Quantum Physics and Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5212-6_12.
  • Blackmore, Susan. 2007. “Mind over Matter?” The Guardian - Medical Research (Opinion), 2007. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/aug/28/mindovermatter.
  • Chugani, Harry T., Michael E. Phelps, and John C. Mazziotta. 1987. “Positron Emission Tomography Study of Human Brain Functional Development.” I 22 (4): 487–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410220408.
  • Clark, Andy, and David Chalmers. 1998. “The Extended Mind.” Analysis 58 (1): 7–19.
  • Clayton, Philip. 2002. “Neuroscience, the Person, and God: An Emergentist Account.” In Neuroscience and the Person. Scientific Perspective on Divine Action. Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory Publications.
  • Farah, Martha J., and Andrea S. Heberlein. 2007. “Personhood and Neuroscience: Naturalizing or Nihilating?” American Journal of Bioethics 7 (1): 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160601064199.
  • Fletcher, Joseph. 1979. Humanhood: Essays on Biomedical Ethics. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
  • Froese, Tom, and Ezequiel A. Di Paolo. 2011. “The Enactive Approach: Theoretical Sketches from Cell to Society.” Pragmatics & Cognition 19 (1): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.19.1.01fro.
  • Fuchs, Thomas. 2018. Ecology of the Brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Giménez-Amaya, José Ignacio Murillo; José Manuel. 2008. “Tiempo, Conciencia y Libertad.” Acta Philosophica 17.
  • Hadariová, Lucia, Matej Vesteg, Vladimír Hampl, and Juraj Krajčovič. 2018. “Reductive Evolution of Chloroplasts in Non-Photosynthetic Plants, Algae and Protists.” Current Genetics 64 (2): 365–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00294-017-0761-0.
  • Haggard, Patrick, and Martin Eimer. 1999. “On the Relation between Brain Potentials and the Awareness of Voluntary Movements.” Experimental Brain Research 126 (1): 128–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210050722.
  • Haugeland, J. 1993. “Mind Embodied and Embedded.” In Mind and Cognition: 1993 International Symposium, 233–67. Academia Sinica.
  • Huettel, Scott A., AW Song, and G McCarthy. 2004. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Sunderland, Massachussets: Sinauer Associates.
  • Koenig-Robert, Robert, and Joel Pearson. 2019. “Decoding the Contents and Strength of Imagery before Volitional Engagement.” Scientific Reports 9: 3904.
  • Laplane, Lucie, Paolo Mantovani, Ralph Adolphs, Hasok Chang, and Alberto Mantovani. 2019. “Why Science Needs Philosophy” 116 (10): 3948–52. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900357116.
  • Libet, B. 1999. “Do We Have Free Will?” Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (8–9): 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195381641.003.0002.
  • Libet, B., E. W. Wright, and C. A. Gleason. 1982. “Readiness-Potentials Preceding Unrestricted ‘spontaneous’ vs. Pre-Planned Voluntary Acts.” Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 54 (3): 322–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(82)90181-X.
  • Logothetis, N. K., M. Auguth, A. Oeltermann, Jon Pauls, and T. Trinath. 2001. “A Neurophysiological Investigation of the Basis of the BOLD Signal in FMRI.” Nature 412 (6843): 150–57. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v412/n6843/full/412150a0.html.
  • Luntz, Stephen. 2019. “Scientists Can Read Your Mind before You Know You’ve Made a Decision.” Iflscience. 2019. https://www.iflscience.com/brain/scientists-can-read-your-mind-before-you-know-youve-made-a-decision/?fbclid=IwAR3yB59gFWR9Rxnd1Oc_SammWqBwFiJJMoKHdddzv5yNwL8T3-QVPvp22ik.
  • Menon, V., and S. Crottaz-Herbette. 2005. “Combined EEG and FMRI Studies of Human Brain Function.” International Review of Neurobiology 66: 291–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0074-7742(05)66010-2.
  • Mukamel, Roy, and Itzhak Fried. 2012. “Human Intracranial Recordings and Cognitive Neuroscience.” Annual Review of Psychology 63 (1): 511–37. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145401.
  • Pashler, Harold, and Eric Jan Wagenmakers. 2012. “Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence?” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 528–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612465253.
  • Poldrack, Russell A., Chris I. Baker, Joke Durnez, Krzysztof J. Gorgolewski, Paul M. Matthews, Marcus R. Munafò, Thomas E. Nichols, Jean Baptiste Poline, Edward Vul, and Tal Yarkoni. 2017. “Scanning the Horizon: Towards Transparent and Reproducible Neuroimaging Research.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 18 (2): 115–26. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.167.
  • Powell, Kendall. 2006. “How Does the Teenage Brain Work?” Nature 442: 865–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/442865a.
  • Russell, Robert John, Nancey Murphy, Theo C. Meyering, and Michael A. Arbib. 2002. Neuroscience and the Person. Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action. Vatican City State: Vatican Observatory Publications.
  • Tomasello, M., and M. J. Farrar. 1986. “Joint Attention and Early Language.” Child Development 57 (6): 1454–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1986.tb00470.x.
  • Wagner, Nils-Frederic, and Georg Northoff. 2014. “Habits: Bridging the Gap between Personhood and Personal Identity.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8 (May): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00330.
  • Wise, Steve. 2002. “‘Practical Autonomy’ Entitles Some Animals to Rights.” Nature 416: 785. https://doi.org/10.1038/416785a.
  • Wolff, Annemarie, Daniel A Di, Giovanni Javier, and Takashi Nakao. 2019. “The Temporal Signature of Self : Temporal Measures of Resting- State EEG Predict Self-Consciousness,” no. September 2018: 789–803. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24412.
  • Yang, Yongjie, and Rob Jackson. 2019. “Astrocyte Identity: Evolutionary Perspectives on Astrocyte Functions and Heterogeneity.” Current Opinion in Neurobiology 56: 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2018.11.006.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet