Suchergebnisse

Lassen die modernen Neurowissenschaften von Begriffen wie Bewusstsein, Emotion und Handlungsfreiheit am Ende nichts mehr übrig? Was ist die Natur des Menschen? Wie frei sind wir? Albert Newen stellt systematisch dar, was wir über das Verhältnis von Körper und Geist wissen und umreißt die Fragestellungen einer modernen Philosophie des Geistes. Albert Newen ist Professor für Philosophie an der Ruhr-Universität Bochum.

Dieser Band bietet aktuelle Beiträge zu drei zentralen Gebieten der analytischen Philosophie. Teil I, 'Logik', umfasst Texte zur Logik und Mathematik, die das weite Feld der Philosophischen Logik erkennbar machen. Teil II des Buches trägt den Titel 'Begriffe, Kausalität und Selbstwissen'; in ihm sind Detailuntersuchungen zu wichtigen Konzepten der analytischen Philosophie versammelt. In Teil III des Bandes, 'Prinzipien des Handelns', werden analytische Zugänge zu Fragen der praktischen Philosophie exemplarisch aufgezeigt

AbstractA recalled memory is deemed authentic when it accurately represents how one experienced the original event. However, given the convincing research in cognitive science on the constructive nature of memory, this inevitably leads to the question of the 'bounds of authenticity'. That is, how similar does a memory have to be to the original experience to still count as authentic? In this paper we propose a novel account of 'Situated Authenticity' which highlights that the norms of authenticity are context-dependent. In particular, we show that each of the three core functions of episodic memory (self, social and directive) is correlated with patterned changes in levels of conceptualization (e.g., concrete construal versus abstract construal of the event). We support this theoretical account with existing empirical data. We conclude the paper by showing how our account of Situated Authenticity supplements ongoing discussions on memory contextualism, and providing an outline of how our account, which is currently elaborated targeting a phenomenological level, may also be elaborated on a processing level using the concept of representational format.

AbstractWe investigated how apparent threat of an ambiguous stimuli modulates infants' looking to interaction partners of varying familiarity (mother, familiar experimenter, unfamiliar experimenter). We hypothesized a preference for familiar informants under higher apparent threat, but a preference for unfamiliar informants under lower apparent threat. The informant encouraged infants (N = 104, 8–13 months) to cross a visual cliff in one of two apparent threat conditions (lower vs. higher drop‐off). Under lower threat, infants looked equally long to all informants, but switched gazes more often between their mother and the cliff. Infants explored the cliff more and crossed more often in the mother condition compared to the other two conditions. They also expressed less negative affect in the presence of the mother compared to the unfamiliar experimenter, but not compared to the familiar experimenter. Under high threat, a similar pattern emerged, except that looking duration to the unfamiliar informant was shorter compared to the low threat condition. Heart rate acceleration appeared when infants were placed on the cliff compared to a baseline phase. Higher levels of negative affectivity (but not higher arousal) were observed under higher compared to lower threat. Overall, we found little evidence of the influence of threat within the visual cliff task. We argue that infants may have perceived the cliff as quite challenging even in the lower threat condition and call for more research on the situational embeddedness of early social learning processes.