2022/07/14 by John Bickle · 1 voice
Arts and Humanities · #Philosophy and History of Science
paper · doi:10.53765/20512201.29.7.175
openalex publication_date 2022/07/14 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
I recommend replacing Piccinini's elaborate metaphysics that grounds his approach in Neurocognitive Mechanisms with metascience. Reconceived as metascience, Piccinini's discussion of numerous case studies from recent neuroscience in his book's final chapters makes a strong case for his proposal that current neuroscience trades in neural representations and a special kind of computation over them. But I contrast this account with what a metascience focused on recent developments in 'molecular and cellular cognition' reveals, namely an account that no longer has use for 'levels', a notion that has long infected new mechanism and remains prominent in Piccinini's latest contribution.