LEADER 03512oam 2200505 450 001 9910137088503321 005 20230621140037.0 010 $a9782889196685 (ebook) 035 $a(CKB)3710000000824753 035 $a(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/44607 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000000824753 100 $a20191103c2015uuuu uu | 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurmn|---annan 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aDecision-making experiments under philosophical analysis $ehuman choice as a challenge for neuroscience /$fedited by Gabriel José Corrêa Mograbi and Carlos Eduardo Batista de Sousa 210 $cFrontiers Media SA$d2015 210 1$aFrance :$cFrontiers Media SA,$d2015 215 $a1 online resource (123 pages) $cillustrations, charts 225 1 $aFrontiers Research Topics 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references. 330 $aThis introduction just aims to be a fast foreword to the special topic now turned into an e-book. The Editorial "Decision-Making Experiments under a Philosophical Analysis: Human Choice as a Challenge for Neuroscience" alongside with my opinion article "Neurophilosophical considerations on decision making: Pushing-up the frontiers without disregarding their foundations" play the real role of considering in more details the articles and the whole purpose of this e-book. What I must highlight in this foreword is that our intention with such a project was to deepen into the very foundations of our current paradigms in decision neuroscience and to philosophically moot its foundations and repercussions. Normal Science (a term coined by Philosopher Thomas Kuhn) works under a research consensus among a scientific community: A shared paradigm, consolidated methods, widespread convictions. Pragmatically, winning formulas must be kept, although, not at any cost. What differentiates a gifted and revolutionary scientist from a more bureaucratic colleague is the capacity and willingness of constantly reevaluating, depurating and refining his/her own paradigm. That is best strategy to avoid that a paradigm itself would gradually come under challenge. In my view, some achievements, in this sense, were brought about in our project. The e-book will be inspiring and informative for both neuroscientists that are concerned with the very foundations of their works and for philosophers that are not blind to empirical evidence. Kant once said: ?Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind?. Paraphrasing Kant we could say: Philosophy without science is empty, science without philosophy is blind. 517 $aDecision-Making Experiments under Philosophical Analysis 606 $aNeuroscience 610 $aDecision Making 610 $aneurophilosophy 610 $afree will and culture 610 $acompatibilism 610 $arisk and uncertainty 610 $adecision neuroscience 610 $aIntertemporal choice 610 $aNeuroethics 610 $apreference and moral judgment 610 $aadaptive decision 615 0$aNeuroscience. 676 $a153.8/3 700 $aCarlos Eduardo Batista de Sousa$4auth$01364629 702 $aMograbi$b Gabriel José Corrêa 702 $aBatista de Sousa$b Carlos Eduardo 801 0$bUkMaJRU 912 $a9910137088503321 996 $aDecision-making experiments under philosophical analysis$93386068 997 $aUNINA