Neuroscience had a huge improvement in the last decades due to great advances in research and technology.
More and more we can understand the correlations between knowledge and brain even in the neurochemical level.
All that studies make us to think that the only language which can be really used to express knowledge is the language of Neuroscience.
Neuroscience is necessary to understand knowledge but it is not sufficient to include all the conditions and dimensions of knowledge.
Several other disciplines are usefull to understand knowledge.
Before Neuroscience was created, humankind already had "language". This very old capability of humankind was used to create any branch of science, even Neuroscience.
Of course someone can talk about method. One thing is a kind of "common language" and other thing is a "scientific language" built with "method". It is true, but even the method used a language that existed before, or elaborated new words from previus languages.
The languages of Human Sciences, or Humanities, are also very important to understand knowledge.
Although Neuroscience is very important it can not replace Philosophy.
It cannot replace History, Sociology, Anthropology, etc.
...and, a little more polemicist, it cannot replace Psychology.
Only in a reductionist way of thinking Neuroscience could be sufficient to all knowledge.
By an inter and transdisciplinary approach among different fields, we can better understand knowledge, even respecting several cultural contexts, without eliminating it.
We know that some tendencies assume to be reductionist, but in "Neuro-Humanities" we don't think so.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário